Citation network
Jay Vs. Boyd
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 11, 1956
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
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 345 (1956) U.S. Supreme Court Jay v. BoydSearch
-
U.S. 345 (1956) Jay v. BoydSearch
-
of deportation proceeding is more clearly within statutory authority than the regulations sustained in Knauff v. ShaughnessySearch
-
U. S. 537 , and Shaughnessy v. MezeiSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
But that point has been abandoned, and, in this Court, petitioner in effect concedes that he is deportable. See Galvan v. PressSearch
-
such aliens have been given a right to a discretionary determination on an application for suspension, cf. Accardi v. ShaughnessySearch
-
Berman v. UnitedSearch
-
of deportation, we should interpret the statute by resolving all doubts in the applicant's favor. Cf. United States v. MinkerSearch
-
U. S. 187 -188. But we must adopt the plain meaning of a statute, however severe the consequences. Cf. Galvan v. PressSearch
-
Our conclusion in this case is strongly supported by prior decisions of this Court. In both Knauff v. ShaughnessySearch
-
ambiguous statute as authorizing the use of confidential information in a deportation proceeding. Cf. Kwong Hai Chew v. ColdingSearch
-
of regulations governing suspension procedures so as to give effect, if possible, to all of its provisions. Cf. Lawson v. SuwanneeSearch
-
See Accardi v. ShaughnessySearch
-
Marcello v. BondsSearch
-
Kaloudis v. ShaughnessySearch
-
Anderson v. AndersonSearch
-
Losieau v. HunterSearch
-
Rule 32(a), Fed.Rules Crim.Proc. Cf. Williams v. NewSearch
-
See Knauff v. ShaughnessySearch
-
validity should be avoided. That rule does not authorize a departure from clear meaning. E.g., United States v. SullivanSearch
-
Hopkins Federal Savings & Loan Assn. v. ClearySearch
-
as herein interpreted gives us no difficulty. Cf. Williams v. NewSearch
-
But probation and suspension of criminal sentence come only after conviction of crime. Cf. Williams v. NewSearch
-
The constitutionality of this Act authorizing deportation for conduct legal when it occurred was sustained in Galvan v. PressSearch
-
S. 522 . Mr. Justice Douglas and I dissented. On April 6, 1953, President Eisenhower sent a message to Senator Arthur V. WatkinsSearch
-
Fong Yue Ting v. UnitedSearch
-
Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
Toth v. QuarlesSearch
-
In re Oliver, 333 U. S. 257 . Cf. Kinsella v. KruegerSearch
-
As Mr. Justice Bradley said for the Court in Boyd v. UnitedSearch
-
See also dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Brewer in Fong Yue Ting v. UnitedSearch
-
See Shaughnessy v. UnitedSearch
-
the nature of a delegated power may preclude regulation, see, e.g., the Canadian case Attorney-General of Canada v. BrentSearch
-
law -- and yet infuse it with a denial of what is basic to such a system. See, e.g., Ohio Bell Telephone Co. v. PublicSearch
-
Peters v. HobbySearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Jay v. BoydSearch
-
and Shaughnessy v. MezeiSearch
-
See Galvan v. PressSearch
-
Cf. United States v. MinkerSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial