Boutilier v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Based on congressional intent combined with commonly accepted psychiatric ideas of the time, the Supreme Court approved the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s policy of classifying gays and lesbians as ineligible for immigration.

Chae Chan Ping v. United States

In addition to recognizing the sovereign power of Congress to exclude any groups fromimmigration, the decision in this case reaffirmed congressional discretion to abrogate or modify treaties.

Chang Chan v. Nagle

The Chang Chan ruling upheld the application of a law disallowing the entrance of some foreign wives of U.S. citizens.

Cheung Sum Shee v. Nagle

The Cheung Sum Shee ruling held that treaty provisions guaranteeing rights for foreign citizens were legally binding unless Congress had clearly and explicitly abrogated those rights.

Chew Heong v. United States

In the first of the Supreme Court’s Chinese exclusion cases, the Chew Heong decision affirmed that a Chinese citizen had the benefit of rights promised in treaties with China unless the treaties had been clearly and explicitly repealed by Congress.

Chin Bak Kan v. United States

The decision demonstrated that the majority of the justices sympathized with the vigorous enforcement of the Chinese Exclusion Acts and that they were not disposed to allow minor procedural defects to interfere with the deportation of persons entering the country illegally.

Chinese Exclusion Cases

When making decisions that dealt with the various Chinese Exclusion Acts, the Supreme Court examined the language of the legislation and attempted to discern the intent of Congress.

Chy Lung v. Freeman

Based on principles of federalism, the Chy Lung decision put limitations on the extent to which the states might restrict the admission of persons into the country.

Dada v. Mukasey

The Dada decision recognized the right of immigrants to pursue motions to reopen their cases after agreeing to voluntary departure, thereby permitting such immigrants to present new facts to immigration officials.

Fedorenko v. United States

The Fedorenko decision established that the citizenship of a naturalized citizen may be revoked in cases when individuals intentionally provided false information to enter the country or to obtain materialization.

Foley v. Connelie

Upholding a state law that discriminated against aliens, the Supreme Court in the Foley decision departed from a previous decision based on strict scrutiny, thereby making it much more likely that similar policies would be upheld.

Fong Yue Ting v. United States

Upholding the constitutionality of the Geary Act of 1892, the controversial Fong Yue Ting decision recognized that the U.S. Congress had almost unlimited discretion to establish all aspects of the nation’s immigration policy, including the rules and procedures for alien registration and deportation.

Galvan v. Press

In the context of the Cold War, the Galvan decision upheld the authority of the U.S. government to order the deportation of persons who had been members of the Communist Party, even if there was no good evidence that they had understood the party’s advocacy of violent revolution.

Graham v. Richardson

The Richardson decision was the first in a series of rulings that struck down discriminatory state laws denying public benefits to noncitizens.

Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong

The Hampton decision took an expansive view of noncitizens’ right to public employment and severely restricted the extent to which the federal government and federal agencies might refuse to employ noncitizens.

Head Money Cases

The Head Money Cases expanded the powers of Congress to control immigration, to use taxation in regulating commerce, and to repeal treaties with foreign countries.

Henderson v. Mayor of the City of New York

Based on Congress’s exclusive authority to regulate international commerce, which included the landing of passengers, the Henderson decision had the effect of striking down all state laws regulating immigration.

Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha

Based on the constitutional principles of separation of powers and bicameralism, the Chadha decision prohibited legislation authorizing one house of Congress fromoverriding a decision made by the executive branch.

Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Lopez-Mendoza

The Lopez-Mendoza decision upheld very minimal application of Fourth Amendment rights to deportation proceedings, thereby allowing immigration officials to use some improperly acquired evidence when deciding whether noncitizens should be expelled from the country.

Immigration and Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr

The St. Cyr decision held that recent federal legislation did not eliminate the federal courts’ jurisdiction to consider habeas corpus petitions from resident aliens who were deportable because of felony convictions.

In re Tiburcio Parrott

In the Parrott ruling, a U.S. district court in California prohibited the application of a constitutional amendment that would have prohibited the employment of Chinese persons in the state.

Jordan v. Tashiro

Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1985)

On April 4, 1985, in Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that oral hearings were required in every case determining refugee status, leading to a radical restructuring of the immigration process.

Ozawa v. United States (1922)

In this dramatic court case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Japanese were not white and therefore could not be naturalized as U.S. citizens.

Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha (1983)

With its decision in Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated the legislative veto that had enabled the U.S. Congress, in negotiation with the executive branch, to veto certain executive actions.

Henderson v. Mayor of New York (1876)

In the wake of the Immigration Act of 1875, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed previous decisions giving states “police power” over newly arriving immigrants, arguing that it infringed federal power to regulate commerce.