Sec. 8.-Powers of Congress Cl. 3.-Commerce-Foreign limitations except those prescribed in the Constitution, and authorizing Congress, in the exercise of the police power, to exclude any particular goods from importation. As was said in the State Tonnage Tax Cases (12 Wall. 214): It is well settled law that the word "commerce," as used in the Constitution, comprehends navigation, and that it extends to every species of commercial intercourse between the United States and foreign nations and to all commerce in the several States, except such as is completely internal. See also Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat, 419. Buttfield v. Stranahan, 192 U. S. 470. Veazie v. Moor, 14 How. 574. Commerce with foreign nations means trade and intercourse. It means commercial intercourse between nations and parts of nations in all its branches. Henderson v. New York, 92 U. S. 270. U. S. v. Holliday, 3 Wall. 417. The Brig Wilson v. U. S., 1 Brock. (U. S.) 423. Philadelphia, etc., S. S. Co. v. Pennsylvania, 122 U. S. 326. Shipment of freight under local bill of lading from interior point in Louisiana to New Orleans, to be delivered to the shipper's or consignee's order, but intended for export, held foreign commerce, governed as to the intrastate transportation in Louisiana by the tariffs on file with the Interstate Commerce Commission. Louisiana v. Texas, etc., R. Co., 229 U. S. 336. Texas, etc., R. Co. v. Sabine Tram Co., 227 U. S. 111. Foreign Vessels Entering United States Ports Congress may unquestionably, under the commerce clause, prohibit any foreign ship from entering our ports, which, in its construction or equipment, uses any improvement patented in this country, or may prescribe the terms and regulations upon which such vessel shall be allowed to enter. Brown v. Duchesne, 19 How. 198. The objection that a vessel owned, possessed, manned, and operated by a foreign State, but engaged in ordinary commerce under charter to a private trader, is immune to libel for services and supplies, can not be raised by her master who, although a naval officer is not functioning as such, and is not shown to have authority to represent his sovereign in making the objection. The "Gul Djemal," 264 U. S. 90. Exclusion of Aliens Under this clause Congress has full power over the exclusion of aliens. It may exclude some and admit others, and has the right to make that exclusion effective by punishing those who assist in introducing aliens in violation of its prohibition. Lees v. U. S., 150 U. S. 480. Lem Moon Sing v. U. S., 158 U. S. 547. Sec. 8.-Powers of Congress Lapina v. Williams, 232 U. S. 78. Bugajewitz v. Adams, 228 U. S. 585. Cl. 3.-Commerce--Foreign The right to exclude undesirable persons from coming to the United States is as fundamental as the right to receive desirable ones. The Nation can protect itself as well as benefit itself. The power of excluding foreigners being an incident of sovereignty belonging to the Government as a part of those sovereign powers delegated by the Constitution, the right to its exercise at any time when in its judgment the interests of the country require it, cannot be surrendered by the treatymaking power. Chinese Exclusion Case, 130 U. S. 581. On the grounds of public policy and by congressional enactment, the United States can prevent aliens or classes of aliens from landing within its borders, and can also expel aliens from the territory of the United States, and can, that such decree may be made effectual, devolve the power and duty of identifying and arresting persons embraced in such decree, and causing their deportation, upon the executive or subordinate officers of the Government. But when Congress chooses to exercise such a policy by subjecting the persons of those whom it would exclude from the United States to infamous punishment at hard labor, or by confiscating their property, such legislation should provide for a judicial trial in order to be constitutional. Wong Wing v. U. S., 163 U. S. 228. Fong Yue Ting v. U. S., 149 U. S. 698. Zakonaite v. Wolf, 226 U. S. 272. Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457. This power is vested in the National Government, to which the Constitution has committed the entire control of international relations, in peace as well as in war. It belongs to the political department of the Government and may be exercised either through treaties or through Congress. Nishimura Ekiu v. U. S., 142 U. S. 651. This power is well established, whether it be based on the inherent power of sovereignty or upon the commerce clause. Turner v. Williams, 194 U. S. 279. But Congress may not control all the dealings of citizens with resident aliens. Keller v. U. S., 213 U. S. 138. Immigration State law requiring masters of vessels arriving at New York to make report of the names, etc., of foreign passengers, etc., is not an interference with foreign commerce. New York v. Miln, 11 Pet. 102. Sec. 8.-Powers of Congress Cl. 3.-Commerce-Foreign State law providing that no alien passengers shall be landed until the sum of $2 is paid to the boarding officer for each passenger so landing is repugnant to the Constitution and therefore void. Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282. See also Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U. S. 275. People v. Compagnie Gen. Transatlantique, 107 U. S. 59. Quarantine and Health Regulations The expense of quarantine regulations cannot be raised by a tax on foreign-owned ships engaged in interstate or international commerce. Peete v. Morgan, 19 Wall. 581. No unconstitutional regulation of commerce is made by State law excluding healthy persons from a locality infested with a contagious disease, whether such persons come from within or without the State. Compagnie Francaise, etc., v. Louisiana, 186 U. S. 380. Congress, by an exertion of its power to regulate foreign commerce, has the authority to forbid merchandise carried in such commerce from entering the United States, and to establish standards of quality for such commodities as are allowed to enter. The Abby Dodge, 223 U. S. 166. Buttfield v. Stranahan, 192 U. S. 493. Game Taken in Foreign Countries Foreign commerce is not unconstitutionally regulated by New York law under which the possession of game within the State during the closed season is forbidden though the game may have been lawfully taken in foreign countries. Silz v. Hesterberg, 211 U. S. 31. Counterfeiting Notes of Foreign Banks Congress, under its authority to define and punish offenses against the laws of nations and to regulate commerce with foreign nations, may provide for punishing as a crime the counterfeiting within the United States of the notes of foreign banks, although such notes are not the issue of a foreign government. U. S. v. Arjona, 120 U. S. 479. Sec. 8.--Powers of Congress Commerce among the Several States Definition and Nature Cl. 3.-Commerce-Interstate Commercial intercourse is an element of commerce which comes within the regulating power of Congress, and commerce among the States consists of intercourse and traffic between their citizens, and includes the purchase, sale, and exchange of commodities, as well as their transportation. Pensacola Tel, Co. v. Western Union Tel. Co., 96 U. S. 9. Welton v. Missouri, 91 U. S. 280. Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1. Gloucester Ferry Co. v. Pennsylvania, 114 U. S. 203. Rosenberger v. Pacific Exp. Co., 241 U. S. 48. Transportation of persons as well as of property is commerce. Commerce not only includes traffic, or buying and selling, but all those means and methods of intercourse which are necessary to the commercial unity of the Nation. It includes the transportation, with all its means and facilities, not only of the property in which they deal, but of the persons of the people; the transmission of information from State to State, including telegraphic communication, and no doubt applies as well to the intangible forces now fast coming into use in the transmission of messages as to the visible wires that stretch in physical continuity from State to State. It makes no difference whether the passenger travels for business or pleasure, or whether the message is a friendly greeting or relates to a momentous business contract. All alike, in passing from State to State, come within the regulating powers vested in the National Congress. Hoke v. U. S., 227 U. S. 308. Second Employers' Liability Cases, 223 U. S. 1. The power to regulate interstate commerce is plenary, complete in itself, and may be exercised to its utmost extent, subject only to such limitations as the Constitution imposes; it was vested in Congress in order to secure equality and freedom in commercial intercourse against discriminating State legislation, but it was not intended that the power should be exercised so as to interfere with private contracts not designed when made to create impediments to such intercourse. The Lottery Case, 188 U. S. 321. Cummings v. Chicago, 188 U. S. 410. Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Mottley, 219 U. S. 467. In re Rahrer, 140 U. S. 545. The Thomas Jefferson, 10 Wheat. 428. Railroad Company v. Richmond, 19 Wall. 584. Sec. 8.-Powers of Congress Cl. 3.--Commerce-Interstate In the exercise of its power over interstate commerce, it is competent for Congress to remove all obstructions upon wharves, natural or artificial, to interstate traffic or the carrying of the mails. In re Debs, 158 U. S. 564. A carrier, by engaging in interstate commerce, does not thereby submit all its business affairs to the regulating power of Congress. Employers' Liability Cases, 207 U. S. 463. Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce, to prevent favoritism, and to secure equal rights to all engaged in interstate trade, and Congress may control those who are conducting interstate commerce by holding them responsible for the intent and purposes of their agents. New York Central, etc., R. Co. v. U. S., 212 U. S. 481. Harriman v. I. C. C., 211 U. S. 407. The power of Congress to regulate commerce extends only to the external commerce of the State, and has no application to commerce which is purely internal; the grant of power to Congress virtually denies the power to interfere with the internal trade and business of the separate States, except as a necessary and proper means of carrying into execution some other power expressly granted or vested. Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1. U. S. v. Dewitt, 9 Wall. 41. Lord v. Goodall, etc., S. S. Co., 102 U. S. 541. Nicol v. Ames, 173 U. S. 509. Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. McKendree, 203 U. S. 514. Baltimore, etc., R. Co. v. I. C. C., 221 U. S. 612. Southern R. Co. v. U. S., 222 U. S. 20. The Abby Dodge, 223 U. S. 166. Houston, etc., R. Co. v. U. S., 234 U. S. 342. Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Illinois, 245 U. S. 493. Wisconsin v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 257 U. S. 563. Navigation Commerce among the several States includes the navigation of public waters for the purpose of the transportation of persons and property. The word "commerce" is to be considered a generic term comprehending navigation or that a control over navigation is necessarily incidental to the power to regulate commerce, and not only gives Congress an unlimited power over the cargoes, but also enables that body to control the vehicles in which they are imported. The power to regulate navigation, however, is an implied power, and has been exercised as being necessarily implied. |