Costanzo v. Tillinghast

Background

The case involves an Italian citizen who was arrested, given a hearing, and ordered deported for managing a house of prostitution under Section 19 of the Act of February 5, 1917. He challenged the deportation in federal court. The District Court dismissed his challenge, and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. A separate constitutional claim he had raised in lower court was later abandoned.

Reasoning

The core question was whether the phrase “within five years after entry,” which appears in the opening clause of the long Section 19 sentence, applies to every listed ground for deportation or only to the first class named. The Court examined the sentence structure, the statute’s proviso saying listed classes are deportable “irrespective of the time of their entry,” and the legislative history showing Section 19 was a compilation of earlier laws that did not impose a five‑year limit for prostitution managers. The Court also relied on a uniform, long‑standing administrative interpretation in the Bureau of Immigration rules. Reading the whole section together, the Court concluded the five‑year phrase does not limit deportation for managing a house of prostitution and gave great weight to the department’s consistent construction.

Real world impact

The ruling affirms the Secretary of Labor’s deportation order and keeps in place the department’s practice of removing people who manage houses of prostitution even if they entered the United States more than five years earlier. It resolves a statutory reading dispute and leaves enforcement authority with the immigration officials who applied the rule.