United States Ex Rel. Claussen v. Day, 279 U.S. 398 (1929)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
United States Ex Rel. Claussen v. Day, 279 U.S. 398 (1929)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 279 U.S. 392, click here.
United States ex rel. Claussen v. Day No. 416 Argued April 10, 1929 Decided-May 13, 1929 279 U.S. 398
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
1. Section 19 of the Naturalization Act, which makes liable to arrest and deportation "any alien who is hereafter sentenced to imprisonment for a term of one year or more because of conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, committed within five years after entry of the alien to the United States," extends to an alien who has declared his intention to become a citizen. § 1. P. 400.
2. An alien who, after coming to this country, went to a foreign port and back as a seaman on an American vessel shipped for the round voyage, made an entry into the United States, within the meaning of § 19, when he returned here. P. 401.
3. An American vessel on the high seas or in foreign waters is not a place included within the United States as defined by the Naturalization Act. Id.
4. In order that there may be an entry within the meaning of the Act, there must be an arrival from some foreign port or place. Id.
16 F.2d 15 affirmed.
Certiorari, 278 U.S. 592, to review a judgment of the circuit court of appeals affirming an order of the district court dismissing a writ of habeas corpus. The merits of the case were first passed on by the courts below in an earlier proceeding against the predecessor in office of the present respondent, which abated in this Court for want of a timely substitution. See 16 F.2d 15; 273 U.S. 688; 276 U.S. 590.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States Ex Rel. Claussen v. Day, 279 U.S. 398 (1929) in 279 U.S. 398 279 U.S. 399. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=UEGVSTYIQF7DYWR.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States Ex Rel. Claussen v. Day, 279 U.S. 398 (1929), in 279 U.S. 398, page 279 U.S. 399. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=UEGVSTYIQF7DYWR.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States Ex Rel. Claussen v. Day, 279 U.S. 398 (1929). cited in 1929, 279 U.S. 398, pp.279 U.S. 399. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=UEGVSTYIQF7DYWR.
|