§
In the Matter of R

10 Cited authorities

  1. Galvan v. Press

    347 U.S. 522 (1954)   Cited 389 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that while aliens may receive procedural due process, the court's ability to review the substantive policy of immigration statutes is limited to review for rationality

  2. Morgan v. United States

    304 U.S. 1 (1938)   Cited 635 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it is "not the function of the court to probe the mental processes of the Secretary"

  3. United States ex rel. Bilokumsky v. Tod

    263 U.S. 149 (1923)   Cited 346 times
    Holding that there is no "presumption of citizenship comparable to the presumption of innocence in a criminal case. . . . To defeat deportation it is not always enough for the person arrested to stand mute at the hearing and put the Government upon its proof."

  4. Mahler v. Eby

    264 U.S. 32 (1924)   Cited 232 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the government failed to comply "with all the statutory requirements"

  5. Fong Yue Ting v. United States

    149 U.S. 698 (1893)   Cited 469 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the political branches could deport residents based solely on their race and deem all people of "the Chinese race" incompetent to sign the affidavit needed for Chinese immigrants to remain lawfully

  6. Eichenlaub v. Shaughnessy

    338 U.S. 521 (1950)   Cited 29 times
    In United States ex rel. Eichenlaub v. Shaughnessy, 338 U.S. 521, 70 S.Ct. 329, 94 L.Ed. 307 (1950), the Supreme Court was confronted with a case involving naturalized citizens, whose citizenship was later revoked and cancelled ab initio for fraud in the procurement.

  7. Zacharias v. McGrath

    105 F. Supp. 421 (D.D.C. 1952)   Cited 6 times

    Civ. A. 1612-50. May 22, 1952. Warren W. Grimes, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff. Charles M. Irelan, U.S. Atty., Ross O'Donoghue, Asst. U.S. Atty., and Raymond E. Baker, Asst. U.S. Atty., all of Washington, D.C., for defendant. McLAUGHLIN, District Judge. This matter came before the Court on motion filed by the Attorney General and the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization for a judgment on the pleadings in an action brought by Plaintiff for a declaratory judgment on the Findings of the

  8. United States v. Murff

    116 F. Supp. 163 (D. Md. 1953)   Cited 3 times

    Civ. A. No. 6954. November 10, 1953. H. Raymond Cluster, Baltimore, Md., for relator. George Cochran Doub, U.S. Atty., Walter E. Black, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Baltimore, Md., Abraham Scharf, Department of Immigration and Naturalization, Baltimore, Md., for respondent. CHESNUT, District Judge. The petitioner, an alien, is seeking a writ of habeas corpus to release him from the custody of the Commissioner of Immigration under a warrant for deportation. A rule to show cause was issued on the filing

  9. Barrios-Macias v. Minton

    114 F. Supp. 470 (W.D. Tex. 1953)   Cited 2 times

    Civ. A. No. 1495. September 3, 1953. Victor B. Gilbert, Homer E. Watkins, El Paso, Tex., for relator. Francis C. Broaddus, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., El Paso, Tex., for defendant. THOMASON, District Judge. On the 30th day of July, 1953, came on to be heard the petition for release of relator herein, after the Court had theretofore on July 24, 1953, ordered the defendant herein to produce the body of said relator before this Court and to show cause why the said defendant held the said Ernesto Barrios-Macias

  10. United States v. Mackey

    115 F. Supp. 45 (S.D.N.Y. 1953)   Cited 1 times

    Civ. 86-57. August 25, 1953. Alfred E. Santangelo, New York City, Peter C. Giambalvo, Brooklyn, N.Y., Joseph S. Hertogs, San Francisco, Cal., and Frank Desimone, Beverly Hills, Cal., for relator. J. Edward Lumbard, U.S. Atty. for the Southern District of New York, New York City (Harold J. Raby, Asst. U.S. Atty., and Lester Friedman, Attorney, Immigration Naturalization Service, Dept. of Justice, New York City, of counsel), for respondent. DIMOCK, District Judge. This is a habeas corpus proceeding