Madar v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Servs.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1a on January 18, 2019 Opinion filed: March 7, 2019
1Opinion of the Court
PORTER, Circuit Judge.
Our immigration laws have long required foreign-born children of citizens to reside or be physically present in the United States for some amount of time to retain citizenship. In extraordinary cases, these retention requirements can be constructively satisfied if circumstances prevented the foreign-born individual from complying with the statute. But while equity may allow someone to retain citizenship, it has only supported transmitting that retained citizenship to a descendant in rare cases-typically, when a government error causes citizenship to lapse.
Here, we…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Keith A. Hill v. Borough of Kutztown and Gennaro Marino, Mayor of Kutztown, in His Individual and Official CapacityCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2006
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. PhinpathyaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Engine Manufacturers Ass'n v. South Coast Air Quality Management DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Newark Cab Association v. City of NewarkCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Schaeffer v. FrakesNebraska Supreme Court · 2020
- BAEZ MORFA v. BLINKENDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2022
- BROWN v. C.E.C.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
- Government Employees Retiremen v. Government of the Virgin IslanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2021
- Guerra Vasquez v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2026
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.