101 PHIL 115
Petitioner, also in behalf of other alien residents’ corporations and partnerships, brought this action to obtain a judicial declaration that RA 1180 is unconstitutional. Petitioner contends, among others, that said act violates the equal protection of laws and that it violates the treaty of the Philippines with China. Solicitor General contends that the act was a valid exercise of the police power and that not a single treaty was infringed by said act.
Whether or not RA 1180 violates the equal protection of laws
The equal protection of the law clause is against undue favor and individual or class privilege, as well as hostile discrimination on the oppression of inequality. The real question at hand is whether or not the exclusion of the future aliens for the retail trade unreasonable. The equal protection clause “is not infringed by a specified class if it applies to all persons within such class and reasonable grounds exist for making a distinction between those who fall within such class and those who do not”. Aliens are under no special constitutional protection which forbids a classification otherwise justified simply because the limitation of the class falls along the lines of nationality. The difference in status between citizens and aliens constitute a basis for reasonable classification in the exercise of police power.