Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Nishikawa Vs. Dulles

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Mar 31, 1958

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

69 entries 7 linked 62 unlinked
Show
  1. Perkins Vs. Elg US Supreme Court · May 29, 1939
  2. United States Vs. Gay US Supreme Court · Apr 07, 1924
  3. Perez Vs. Brownell US Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1958
  4. Mandoli Vs. Acheson US Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1952
  5. United States Vs. Minker US Supreme Court · Jan 16, 1956
  6. Mackenzie Vs. Hare US Supreme Court · Dec 06, 1915
    Relied / Followed
  7. Leland Vs. Oregon US Supreme Court · Jun 09, 1952
  8. U.S. 129 (1958) U.S. Supreme Court Nishikawa v. Dulles
    Search
  9. U.S. 129 (1958) Nishikawa v. Dulles
    Search
  10. We need not in this case consider the constitutionality of Section 401(c). This case thus differs from Perez v. Brownell
    Search
  11. ante, p. 356 U. S. 44 , and Trop v. Dulles
    Search
  12. may be as to what conduct may, consistent with the Constitution, be said to result in loss of nationality, cf. Perez v. Brownell
    Search
  13. it is settled that no conduct results in expatriation unless the conduct is engaged in voluntarily. Mandoli v. Acheson
    Search
  14. the Government to prove an act that shows expatriation by clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence. In Gonzales v. Landon
    Search
  15. Schneiderman v. United
    Search
  16. Acheson v. Hisao
    Search
  17. Acheson v. Kiyokuro
    Search
  18. Camara v. Nicolls
    Search
  19. Baumgartner v. United
    Search
  20. Gonzales v. Landon
    Search
  21. Acheson v. Hisao
    Search
  22. Murata, 342 U.S. 900, and Acheson v. Kiyokuro
    Search
  23. attending the alleged acts of expatriation and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom. In Bruni v. Dulles
    Search
  24. Gonzales as requiring the Government to prove voluntariness by clear, convincing and unequivocal evidence. Lehmann v. Acheson
    Search
  25. can also be read as placing that burden on the Government. It is, clear at least, that the Third Circuit, Lehmann v. Acheson
    Search
  26. Perri v. Dulles
    Search
  27. F.2d 586, as well as the Second Circuit, Augello v. Dulles
    Search
  28. Government must rebut. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit took a contrary view prior to Bruni v. Dulles
    Search
  29. supra. Alata v. Dulles
    Search
  30. Acheson v. Maenza
    Search
  31. United States v. Minker
    Search
  32. Kawakita v. United
    Search
  33. therefore, American citizenship is his constitutional birthright. See United States v. Wong
    Search
  34. expatriate any citizen. As the CHIEF JUSTICE and MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS explain in their dissenting opinions in Perez v. Brownell
    Search
  35. from our armed forces, establish a conclusive presumption of intention to throw off American nationality. Cf. Tot v. United
    Search
  36. persuasive evidence in the particular case of a purpose to abandon citizenship. To the extent that Mackenzie v. Hare
    Search
  37. U. S. 299 , and Savorgnan v. United
    Search
  38. It is common ground that conduct will result in expatriation only if voluntarily performed. See Mackenzie v. Hare
    Search
  39. Acheson v. Kiyokuro
    Search
  40. in conduct of which the consequence is loss of citizenship -- by clear, convincing and unequivocal evidence. Gonzales v. Landon
    Search
  41. U.S. 920, adopting the standard of Schneiderman v. United
    Search
  42. States, 320 U. S. 118 , and Baumgartner v. United
    Search
  43. of outward events, should have the burden of proving what is state of mind was. See Selma, Rome & Dalton R. Co. v. United
    Search
  44. gravest doubt is cast on the applicability of the normal assumption -- even in a prosecution for murder ( see Leland v. Oregon
    Search
  45. a finding that service in a foreign army was voluntary. The Second and Third Circuits have held that it does. Augello v. Dulles
    Search
  46. Lehmann v. Acheson
    Search
  47. Alata v. Dulles
    Search
  48. Bruni v. Dulles
    Search
  49. c) is, in my view, foreclosed by Perez v. Brownell
    Search
  50. Hamamoto v. Acheson
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial