Supreme Court Declines to Review Kentucky Restaurateurs' Convictions for Harboring Unauthorized Immigrants

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review a Kentucky federal jury's verdict convicting two restaurateurs on four counts of harboring unauthorized immigrants, rejecting the business owners' arguments that they were not intentionally hiding the migrants from the government.

According to an order list released Monday, the justices declined to review a Sixth Circuit panel's split ruling in November. Restaurateurs Yun Zheng and Yan Qiu Wu were found guilty in January 2022 after they hired four unauthorized Hispanic men to work at their restaurant, Tokyo Dragon Buffet Inc. Court documents reveal that the two paid the men only in cash and had them live in the duo's basement to avoid deportation.

In their February petition for a writ of certiorari, Zheng and Qiu Wu contended that the Sixth Circuit's decision in their case had exacerbated existing confusion for prosecutors regarding whether intent to harbor unauthorized immigrants must be proven. The restaurateurs argued that the split panel did not properly address this question.

"Convictions obtained today might be deemed unfounded tomorrow; prosecutors do not know how much evidence they must adduce, much less prove beyond a reasonable doubt, at trial," the restaurateurs said.

The government, in its April brief opposing the duo's requested writ of certiorari, asserted that there was no reason to believe the restaurateurs' case would have concluded differently in another appellate circuit. It also maintained that there was no error in the Sixth Circuit's majority decision, which aligns with the statute against harboring unauthorized immigrants.

All three judges on the Sixth Circuit panel agreed that the government did not need to prove the two restaurateurs paid the four unauthorized workers in cash, had them live in the restaurateurs' basement, instructed them not to go outside except for work, and transported them directly to and from the restaurant with the specific intent to hide those workers from the government. However, only two out of the three judges agreed that the government did not need to prove intent to secure a conviction.

In a separate opinion, U.S. Circuit Judge Raymond M. Kethledge concurred with the majority on affirming the conviction but differed on whether prosecutors had to show Zheng and Qiu Wu intentionally harbored the unauthorized immigrants. According to Judge Kethledge, the panel majority did not properly address the question of intent and instead focused on whether Zheng and Qiu Wu harbored the migrants "knowingly," a separate issue not presented to the panel.

Zheng and Qiu Wu are represented by Riddhi Dasgupta, Robert K. McBride, and Kenneth A. Foisy of Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, and Sarah C. Larcade of McKinney & Namei Co. LPA.

The government is represented by Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Nicole M. Argentieri, and Javier A. Sinha of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The case is Yun Zheng, aka Wendy Zheng, and Yan Qiu Wu, aka Jason Wu, Petitioners v. United States, case number 23-928, in the Supreme Court of the United States.