Mannerfrid v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 federal appellate · 3 district ·

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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Sec. 622.43 Class XV-C Neutral Aliens requesting relief from training and service and aliens not acceptable to the armed forces. “(a) Any registrant (whether a national of United States or an alien) who, because of his nationality or ancestry, is within a class of persons not acceptable to the land or naval forces for training and service or to the Director of Selective Service for work of national importance under civilian direction shall be placed in Class IV-C. The Director of Selective Service will advise local boards which classes of registrants are not acceptable. “(b) When an alien registrant who is a citizen or subject of a neutral country * * * prior to Ms induction into the land or naval forces of the United States files with Ms local board an original and one copy of an Application by Alien for Relief from Military Service (Form 301) completely filled out, signed, and sworn to, he shall be relieved from liability for training and service under the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, as amended; and shall thereafter be debarred from becoming a citizen of the United States. * * * “(e) The classification of an alien registrant who is now or hereafter classified in Glass 1-A, Glass 1-A-O, or Glass IV-E shall be changed to Glass IV-0 if, under the procedure prescribed by Secs. 623.71 to 623.77, inclusive, the land or naval forces refuse to accept him for training and service or the Director of Selective Service refuses to accept him for work of national importa”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Zumsteg

2. ““Petitioner did not knowingly and intentionally waive his rights to citizenship. In fact, because of the misleading circumstances of this case, he never had an opportunity to make an intelligent election between the diametrically opposed courses required as a matter of strict law. Considering all the circumstances of the case, we think that to bar petitioner, nothing less than an intelligent waiver is requir ed by elementary fairness.” 341 U.S. at page 47 , 71 S.Ct. at page 556 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Zumsteg

3. ““ * * * would be no more than a further step of the lenity that the Court exercised in Moser v. United States, supra, and that the difference is one of degree; but that is so often the determining factor in situations of this kind, that we need not support its propriety if the difference in degree be wide enough. We can say no more than that we do not believe that Congress would have tolerated the necessary laxity in this instance.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re the Petition for Naturalization of Bouchage