Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of California.
Mr. Peyton Ford, of Washington, D.C., for appellant.
Mr. Henry G. Bodkin, of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.
Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
A United States Attorney filed an information in a Federal District Court charging that the appellee, Lem Hoy, 'did attempt to induce, assist, encourage, and solicit, [330 U.S. 724, 725] certain alien persons to migrate to the United States as contract laborers ... who were not alien contract laborers duly entitled to migrate to the United States under the Act of February 5, 1917, or to enter or migrate to the United States under any other law of the United States, as the defendant then and there well knew.' The conduct charged was made an offense by 5 of the 1917 Immigration Act referred to in the information. 39 Stat. 874, 879, 8 U.S.C. 139, 8 U.S.C.A. 139. Hoy appeared, waived indictment, asked for a bill of particulars, and moved to dismiss the information on the ground that 5 of the 1917 Act had been repealed by 5(g) of the Farm Labor Supply Appropriation Act of 1944. 58 Stat. 11, 15, 16, 50 U.S.C.App., Supp. V, 1355(g), 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, 1355(g). The bill of particulars showed that Hoy had written a letter to certain persons living in Mexico to induce them to come to the United States to work for him. In the letter Hoy told them that 'it makes no difference if you pass as contraband (smuggle in), as whenever the Immigration catches you I will get you out with a bond.' The letter also directed the aliens to see a man near the border who would 'bring' them to Hoy for $25, and stated that Hoy would 'arrange everything.' It was stipulated that Hoy wanted the men to work for him as agricultural laborers.
Holding that the 1944 Farm Labor Act had made the 1917 Act inapplicable to such farm laborers, and therefore to those who induced their entry, the District Court dismissed the information. Since this dismissal was based on the construction of the 1917 Act as the Government sought to apply it in the information, the case is properly here on direct appeal from the District Court. 18 U.S.C. Supp. V 682, 18 U.S.C.A. 682; 28 U.S.C. 345, 28 U.S.C.A. 345.
The 1944 Farm Labor Act, by its terms, was designed to facilitate the war-time employment, and therefore the immigration into the United States for a limited stay, of [330 U.S. 724, 726] agricultural laborers from North, South, and Central America, and islands adjacent thereto. In determining whether this information was properly dismissed, it is appropriate for us to consider whether Congress intended in the 1944 Act to remove all restrictions, enforceable by sanctions, against immigration into the United States of such agricultural laborers from the western hemisphere; and at the same time whether it intended to repeal, not only the provision which prohibited contract laborers from entering the country, but also, the longstanding law which made it a criminal offense to induce such persons, barred by law, to enter. 1 If the 1944 Act has these effects, it marks a complete reversal of the congressional policy which has been followed for more than half a century.