Chung Fook v. White
|Chung Fook v. White|
|Argued February 26, 1924
Decided April 7, 1924
|Full case name||Chung Fook v. Edward White, Commissioner of Immigration for the Port of San Francisco|
|Citations||264 U.S. 443 (more)
44 S.Ct. 361, 68 L.Ed. 781
|Prior history||287 F. 533 (9th Cir.), cert. granted, 262 U.S. 740 (1923).|
|Majority||Sutherland, joined by Taft, McKenna, Holmes, Van Devanter, McReynolds, Brandeis, Butler, Sanford|
|Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, ch. 29, § 22, 39 Stat. 891.|
Chung Fook v. White, 264 U.S. 443 (1924), was a landmark Supreme Court case. It was significant in that it marked the end of the era of strict plain meaning interpretation of statutes and the beginning of the looser American Rule that the intent of the law was more important than its text.
A man did not have the automatic right to bring his wife to the United States if he married her after he entered there even if that exception was not explicitly mentioned in the law. The Court recognized that the statute did not seem to make sense the way it gave a particular right to a naturalized citizen that a native-born citizen (Chung Fook) was not permitted. The Court therefore stated that the issue of a law discriminating against native-born citizens was not for the courts to fix; it was the job of Congress to write laws that made sense and the job of the courts "is simply to enforce the law as it is written, unless clearly unconstitutional."
|Wikisource has original text related to this article:|
|This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.|