The Deportation That Failed in Seattle
Two Chinese men arrested in Idaho were ordered deported—until a Seattle court asked whether the commissioner had any jurisdiction at all.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Ah To and another Chinese man who had been arrested in Idaho and ordered deported by a United States commissioner were brought before the court in Seattle yesterday on appeal, and they were discharged for want of jurisdiction.
In giving his decision, the court held that the commissioner had no right to deport the men because they had been taken outside his district. The fact that they were in the customs district made no difference. He maintained that they should have been arrested, if at all, in the judicial district where they were found. He also held that no Chinese person—or any other person—could be arrested without a warrant, or except upon a showing of probable cause.
The case had grown out of an inspection of laundry rooms. The men left last night for their home in Idaho.
“The fact that they were in the customs district did not make any difference.”
Immigration cases still turn on jurisdiction: who may arrest, detain and deport. This 1896 Seattle ruling shows that even under the Chinese exclusion laws, procedural limits could sometimes force the government to let people go.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.