Legal Opinion

Chin Bak Kan v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided June 2, 1902No. 525, 526PublishedCited by 81 opinions

APPEALS FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Complaint under oath was duly made before a commissioner of the United States for the Northern District of New York, charging “ that Chin Bak Kan did, on or about the 18th day of March, 1901, at Burke in said district, knowingly and wrongfully come from Canada, in the province of Quebec, into the Northern District of New York, to wit: into Burke in the county of Franklin and State of…

Read the full summary

APPEALS FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Complaint under oath was duly made before a commissioner of the United States for the Northern District of New York, charging “ that Chin Bak Kan did, on or about the 18th day of March, 1901, at Burke in said district, knowingly and wrongfully come from Canada, in the province of Quebec, into the Northern District of New York, to wit: into Burke in the county of Franklin and State of New York, in the United States, he, the said Chin Bak Kan being then'and there a Chinese person and laborer, and a…

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Fuller

By section one of the act of May 6, 1882, 22 Stat. 58. c. 126, it was provided that from and after the expiration of ninety days, and until the expiration of ten years, the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States should be suspended, and during such suspension it was made unlawful for any Chinese laborer to come, or, having come after the expiration of said ninety days, to remain within the United States.

By section four provision was made for certificates to be granted to such Chinese as were entitled under the treaty of November 17, 1880, to go from, or come to, the United States, of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. Wong Kim ArkSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. United States v. Lee Yen TaiSupreme Court of the United States · 1902

3Cited by81 opinions

  1. Ng Fung Ho v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. Morrison v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  3. United States v. Ju ToySupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  4. United States Ex Rel. Turner v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  5. United States v. Sing Tuck or King Do & Thirty-OneSupreme Court of the United States · 1904

76 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API