No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 April 2017
1 Petition of Kwan Shun Yue, 94 F . Supp. 804 (S. D. Calif., Dec. 29, 1950). Accord, In re Jeu Foon, 94 F . Supp. 728 (E. D. Ark., Dec. 20, 1950), involving children of treaty merchant. Service on foreign-flag vessels owned by foreign subsidiaries of an American corporation, which signed crews on and off in foreign ports, did not meet the residence requirements, Petition of Bouboulis, 94 F. Supp. 454 (E. D. La., Dec. 20, 1950). In holding that children born in China in 1943 and 1945 to an American father were citizens, though the father had left for China in August, 1940, at the age of 20 years and 7 months and could not return until after the war, the court held that the five year's “residence” by the father after reaching the age of 16 did not require continuous physical presence in the United States, Wong Gan Chee v. Acheson, 95 F. Supp. 816 (N. D. Calif., Feb. 16, 1951).
2 Petition of Schmidinger, 95 F. Supp. 156 (D. Mass., Dec. 22, 1950).
3 Ralich v. United States, 185 F. (2d) 784 (Ct. App. 8th, Dee. 27, 1950), denied naturalization for lack of good moral character, when petitioner was shown to have operated houses of prostitution prior to the five-year period, and to have sworn falsely in regard theretoon her naturalization hearing. In Johnson v. United States, 186 F. (2d) 588 (Ct. App. 2d, Jan. 24, 1951), L. Hand, C. J., held good moral character to be lacking when a married petitioner had lived with a married woman not his wife, there being none of the “extenuating circumstances” within the rule of Petitions of Rudder et al., 159 F. (2d) 695, this JOURNAL, Vol. 42 (1948), p. 214. In view of the Internal Security Act of 1950, a member of the Italian Fascist Party who broke with it in 1937 was held to have failed to show the requisite good moral character and attachment to the principles of the Constitution, Petition of Tucci, 187 F. (2d) 690 (Ct. App. 2d, March 14, 1951).
It was held that the Immigration and Naturalization Service could not indefinitely delay naturalization hearings, Application of Weber, 94 F. Supp. 376 (S. D. N. Y., Dec. 14, 1950). On false swearing in naturalization proceedings, see United States v. Obermeier, 186 F. (2d) 243 (Ct. App. 2d, Dec. 20, 1950).
4 Such action for declaratory judgment, under 8 U.S.C.A. §903, was not prevented by the provision of the Immigration At making decisions of a Board of Special Inquiry final on exclusion of aliens, Mah Ying Og v. McGrath, 187 F. (2d) 199 (Ct. App., Dist.Col.), Dec. 7, 1950). Regarding the right to return to the United States to testify in such proceedings, see Mazza v. Acheson, 95 F. Supp. 752 (N. D. Calif., Feb. 1, 1951), and Look Yim Lin v. Acheson, 95 F. Supp. 583 (N. D. Calif., Feb. 8, 1951).
5 Haruko Furuno v. Acheson, 94 F. Supp. 381 (S. D. Calif., Nov. 14, 1950), refusing to consider a letter of the Secretary of State or opinions of Government agents that Japan remained a “foreign state” ; Mitsue Masuko Kai v. Acheson, 94 F. Supp. 383 (S. D. Calif., Nov. 14, 1950); Seki. Acheson, 94 F. Supp. 438 (S. D. Calif., Nov. 22,1950); Fumi Bokui v. Acheson, 94 F. Supp. 439 (S. D. Calif., Nov. 22, 1950); Funiko Furusho v. Acheson, 94 F. Supp. 1021 (D. Hawaii, Jan. 23, 1951); Akio Kuwahara v.Acheson, 96 F. Supp. 38 (S. D. Calif., March 5, 1951), abandoning the idea that Japan was not a “foreign state.”
No expatriation resulted from service under duress in the Japanese Army: Noburo Kato v. Acheson, 94 F. Supp. 415 (S. D. Calif., Nov. 14, 1950); Ozasa v. Acheson, 94 F. Supp. 436 (S. D. Calif., Nov. 14, 1950). In Eepetto v. United States, 94 F. Supp. 623 (N. D. Calif., Nov. 15, 1950), a person born in 1914 in the United States of an Italian father and taken to Italy in 1920 tried to return to the United States in 1937, 1941, and 1946; in each case the American Consul General refused to provide an American passport. It was held that no expatriation resulted from failure to return to the United States before reaching the age of 23 or within the specified period after the effective date of the 1940 Nationality Act.
6 77 F. Supp. 806
7 McGrath v. Tadayasu Abo, 186 F. (2d) 766 (Ct. App., 9th, Jan. 17, 1951). See also Barber v. Tadayasu Abo, 186 F. (2d) 775 (Ct. App. 9th, Jan. 17, 1951), reversing the decision below, 76 F. Supp. 664, where habeas corpus had been granted to prevent deportation of these renunciants. Here the Court of Appeals held that Congress did not have to authorize persons in the United States to acquire or retain Japanese nationality, such nationality depending on the law of Japan.
8 U.S. ex rel. Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 187 F. (2d) 137 (Ct. App. 2d, Feb. 6,1951).
Holding an indeterminate sentence in a reformatory the equivalent of imprisonment for more than one year for a crime involving moral turpitude, deportation was approved in IT. S. ex rel. McMahon v. Neeley, 186 F. (2d) 846 (Ct. App. 7th, Feb. 1, 1951). Questions of deportation procedure were involved in U. S. ex rel. Jankowski v. Shaughnessy, 186 F. (2d) 580 (Ct. App. 2d, Jan. 29, 1951); and of right to bail in deportation cases, in Carlson v. Landon, 186 F. (2d) 183, and Stevenson v. Landon, ibid. 190 (both Ct. App. 9th, Dec. 16, 1950); Mangaoang v. Boyd, 186 F. (2d) 191 (Ct. App. 9th, Dec. 27, 1950); U. S. ex rel. Mavrokefalus v. Murff, 94 F. Supp. 643 (D. Md., Nov. 28, 1950).
Where Greek seamen were detained on a Greek vessel in an American port at the order of immigration officials, libels for false imprisonment were dismissed when brought against the ship, officers, and immigration officials involved, Papagianakis v. S. S. Samos, 186 F. (2d) 257 (Ct. App. 4th, Dec. 20, 1950).
9 The fact that plaintiff was a non-resident alien did not preclude her attacking the validity of a divorce obtained by her citizen husband in another state, Santangelo v.Santangelo, 78 At. (2d) 245 (Conn., Jan. 9, 1951).