Legal Opinion · Dissent

Pangilinan v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided February 13, 1987No. Nos. 80-4543, 81-5427Published

1Dissent

KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge, with whom Circuit Judges SNEED, KENNEDY, ANDERSON, HALL, WIGGINS, THOMPSON and O’SCANNLAIN join,

dissenting from the order rejecting the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

No doubt moved by what it sees as an injustice, the panel in this case has granted United States citizenship to the petitioners under a statute that expired over 40 years ago. While the panel may have acted from the noblest of motives, its opinion disregards the clear teachings of the Supreme Court in INS v. Hibi, 414 U.S. 5, 94 S.Ct. 19, 38 L.Ed.2d 7 (1973), and on a separate issue creates a square…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Albemarle Paper Co. v. MoodySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. SawyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  3. Hecht Co. v. BowlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  4. Joseph Toussaint, Plaintiffs/appellees/cross-Appellants v. Daniel McCarthy Defendants/appellants/cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
  5. United States v. MendozaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API