Sale v Haitian Centers Council, 509 U.S. 155 (1993)
What was at stake
High-seas interdiction; scope of non-refoulement under INA & Refugee Convention
What happened
In 1992, following a military coup in Haiti, thousands of Haitians fled by boat seeking asylum in the United States. President Bush issued an executive order directing the Coast Guard to intercept vessels carrying Haitian nationals on the high seas and return them to Haiti without allowing them to apply for asylum. Approximately 40,000 refugees were interdicted and repatriated under this policy. The Haitian Centers Council, joined by refugee advocates, challenged the practice, arguing it violated the non-refoulement obligations under the Immigration and Nationality Act and the 1951 Refugee Convention.
What the court decided
Held non-refoulement in INA/Art 33 did not constrain high-seas repatriations; adverse precedent often distinguished or challenged in advocacy.
How the court got there
The Court held that neither the non-refoulement provision of the INA nor Article 33 of the Refugee Convention applied extraterritorially to persons intercepted on the high seas before reaching US territory. The statutory phrase 'within the United States' limited the obligation to those physically present within US borders, and the Convention's protective scope did not extend to actions taken beyond the high-water mark of US territory. The executive branch also possessed inherent authority over foreign affairs and immigration matters, supporting the interception policy.
Who pushed back
Justice Blackmun dissented, joined by Justices Stevens and Souter. He argued the plain text of § 243(h) required protection regardless of where the alien was encountered, and that intercepting vessels and returning refugees constituted 'entry' into US jurisdiction, thereby triggering statutory and constitutional protections.
Statutes and cases cited
- § Immigration and Nationality Act § 243(h)
- § Refugee Convention art. 33
- Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950)
Categories
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.