United States v. Hansen

Helaman Hansen operated a scheme charging noncitizens fees for fraudulent adult adoptions that he claimed would confer U.S. citizenship. He was convicted under 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv), which criminalizes encouraging or inducing illegal immigration for private financial gain. The Ninth Circuit held the statute facially overbroad under the First Amendment because it could punish protected speech. The Supreme Court reversed, ruling that the law targets speech integral to unlawful conduct, specifically solicitation or facilitation of immigration violations, and therefore does not violate the First Amendment. The decision restored Hansen's convictions.

The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit in a 7-2 decision, holding that the statute is not facially overbroad. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the majority opinion. Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.

Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) is facially overbroad under the First Amendment because it criminalizes speech that encourages or induces illegal immigration.

The ruling affirmed broad federal authority to criminalize immigration-related solicitation and narrowed the scope of First Amendment overbreadth challenges in this context. It was seen as a victory for immigration enforcement but raised concerns about potential chilling effects on legitimate advocacy and advice offered to immigrant communities.