Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 189 U.S. 86 - Kaoru Yamataya v. Thomas M Fisher

Kaoru Yamataya v. Thomas M Fisher’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

124
cited by 124 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
15
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 26 district · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 124 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably Landon v. Plasencia (1982), Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. v. Stranahan (1909)

7 federal appellate · 26 district · 19 state decisions — followed in 15 states

2001900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on John Den James Murray and John Kayser v. The Hoboken Land and Improvement Company John Den James B Murray et al. · Wong Wing v. United States · Nishimura Ekiu v. United States · Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Taggart · Lem Moon Sing v. United States

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 124 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Taking all its enactments together, it is clear that Congress did not intend that the mere admission of .an alien, or his mere entering the country, should place him at all times thereafter entirely beyond the control or authority of the executive officers of the government. On the contrary, if the Secretary of the Treasury became satisfied that the immigrant had been allowed to land contrary to the prohibition of that law, then he could, at any time within a year after the landing, cause the immigrant to be taken into custody and deported. The immigrant must be taken to have entered subject to the condition that he might be sent out of the country by order, of the proper executive officers if within a year he was found to have been wrongfully admitted into it, or illegally entered the United States.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““That Congress may exclude aliens of a particular race from the United States; prescribe the terms and conditions upon, which certain classes of aliens may come to this country; establish regulations for sending out of the country such aliens as come here in violation of law; and commit the enforcement of such provisions, conditioxis, and regulations exclusively to executive officers, without judicial intervention — are prixiciples firmly established by the decisions of this court.” 189 U. S. 97 , 23 Sup. Ct. 613 , 47 L. Ed. 721 , and authorities cited.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “it is not competent for the Secretary of the Treasury or any executive officer, at any time within the year limited by the statute, arbitrarily to cause an alien, who has entered the country, and has become subject in all respects to its jurisdiction, and a part of its population, although alleged to be illegally here, to be taken into custody and deported without giving him all opportunity to be heard upon the questions involving his right to be and remain in the United States”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.