Citation network
Ludecke Vs. Watkins
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 21, 1948
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 160 (1948) U.S. Supreme Court Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
U.S. 160 (1948) Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
Marshall, C.J., in Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
Washington, J., in Lockington v. SmithSearch
-
See United States v. AndersonSearch
-
McElrath v. UnitedSearch
-
Hamilton v. KentuckySearch
-
the state of war in relation to which the President has exercised the authority now challenged was terminated. Woods v. CloydSearch
-
Woods v. CloydSearch
-
Woods v. CloydSearch
-
Fleming v. MohawkSearch
-
Kessler v. WatkinsSearch
-
Citizens Protective League v. ClarkSearch
-
Lockington v. SmithSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Citizen's Protective League v. ClarkSearch
-
Schlueter v. WatkinsSearch
-
Hack v. ClarkSearch
-
Kessler v. WatkinsSearch
-
Von Ascheberg v. WatkinsSearch
-
Minotto v. BradleySearch
-
De Lacey v. UnitedSearch
-
Grahl v. UnitedSearch
-
Banning v. PenroseSearch
-
De Cicco v. LongoSearch
-
Schwarzkopf v. UhlSearch
-
D'Esquiva v. UhlSearch
-
Knauer v. JordanSearch
-
The cessation of hostilities does not necessarily end the war power. It was stated in Hamilton v. KentuckySearch
-
to remedy the evils which have arisen from its rise and progress,' and continues during that emergency. Stewart v. KahnSearch
-
of the Act before us, it would hardly touch the true meaning of the statute. United States ex rel. Hirshberg v. MalanaphySearch
-
provisions fixing the date of the expiration of the war powers they confer upon the Executive. See, e.g., Hamilton v. KentuckySearch
-
for the use of such agencies stands as confirmation and ratification of the action of the Chief Executive. Brooks v. DewarSearch
-
Isbrandtsen-Moller Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
war or threatened invasions. See Hamilton v. KentuckySearch
-
the purpose of Congress in connection with the particular right the statute was intended to protect, United States v. AndersonSearch
-
Wall. 700, 79 U. S. 702 , or the particular evil the statute was intended to guard against. McElrath v. UnitedSearch
-
Korematsu v. UnitedSearch
-
The Court cites Woods v. CloydSearch
-
Court appears to adopt the reasons advanced by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in United States ex rel. Kessler v. WatkinsSearch
-
It is undisputed that, in peacetime, an alien is protected by the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. Wong Wing v. UnitedSearch
-
Page 335 U. S. 185 or not a deportation order is based upon procedures affording due process of law. Vajtauer v. CommissionerSearch
-
U. S. 103 , 273 U. S. 106 . In deportation proceedings, due process requires reasonable notice ( Tisi v. TodSearch
-
U. S. 131 , 264 U. S. 134 ), a fair hearing ( Bridges v. WixonSearch
-
Chin Yow v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
Kessler v. WatkinsSearch
-
Schlueter v. WatkinsSearch
-
Hack v. ClarkSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial