The Supreme Court held that the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) had the statutory authority to determine the admissibility of a permanent resident alien in an exclusion hearing, but that permanent resident aliens may claim the protections of the due process clause in such proceedings. (Read the opinion here).
The Supreme Court held that citizenship as prescribed in the Fourteenth Amendment extends to U.S.-born children of foreign subjects or citizens who, at the time of the child’s birth, are permanent residents and are carrying on business in the United States. Such children acquire U.S. citizenship at birth, but this does not apply if the parents are in the United States in any diplomatic or official capacity. (Read the opinion here.)
State attempts to deny welfare benefits to legally resident aliens violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the exclusive powers of the federal government in immigration matters.
The Supreme Court held that the continued exclusion of an entrant noncitizen without hearing does not amount to unlawful detention, because a noncitizen seeking entry does not possess constitutional rights. The Court also held that courts may not temporarily admit a such a noncitizen into the United States pending arrangements for his departure abroad. (Read the opinion here.)
The Supreme Court held that a state university’s policy that categorically denies “in-state” status to domiciled non-immigrant G-4 aliens and their dependents is invalid under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. (Read the opinion here).
The Supreme Court held that three factory surveys conducted by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) did not constitute a seizure of the entire work force under the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court also held that the individual questioning regarding citizenship of the respondents, U.S. citizens and legal residents, did not constitute a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. (Read the opinion here.)
The Supreme Court held that to qualify for asylum, applicants have to show that they have a “well-founded fear” of persecution, and that asylum-seekers can satisfy this standard even if they do not demonstrate that it is more likely than not that they will be persecuted if returned to their home country. (Read the opinion here.)
The Supreme Court held that deportation hearings are civil proceedings, the defendant cannot suppress his or her identity even if subject to an unlawful arrest, and the exclusionary rule does not apply to deportation hearings. Read the opinion here.
The Supreme Court held that the Attorney General did not have the authority to order the permanent exclusion and deportation of a lawful permanent resident of the United States without providing notice of the charges against him and the opportunity to be heard. Read the opinion here.
444 U.S. 252 (1980)
The Supreme Court held that the U.S. government must prove intent to surrender U.S. citizenship and not just the voluntary commission of a expatriating act and that the appropriate standard of proof for analyzing the citizen’s conduct would be proof by a preponderance of the evidence. The Court also held that it is permissible for the government to have a rebuttable presumption that the expatriating act was committed voluntarily. (Read the opinion here.)
