Astrup v. Immigration & Naturalization Service’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2009 · most notably Heckler v. Mathews (1984), Sugarman v. Dougall (1973)
24 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedVilis Martins Lapenieks v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Department of Justice, Etc. (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1426 (§ 315 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1429 (§ 318 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on United States v. Menasche · Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian Nation · Shomberg v. United States · Ceballos v. Shaughnessy · California Department of Human Resources Development v. Java
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We think that Congress used the words 'is or was relieved' to provide that an alien who requests exemption from the military service be held to his agreement to relinquish all claims to naturalized citizenship Only when the Government abides by its part of the agreement and completely exempts him from service in our Armed Forces.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The alien must be one who ‘applies or has applied for exemption or discharge’ from military service and ‘is or was relieved or discharged’ from that service.” Astrup, supra, 402 U.S. at 512-13 , 91 S.Ct. at 1585 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“applies or has applied for exemption or discharge”
2 later decisions 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.