Vance v. Terrazas’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
66 federal appellate · 21 district · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 237 later decisions (39 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Cuyler v. Sullivan (1980), Herman & MacLean v. Huddleston (1983)
66 federal appellate · 21 district · 25 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
reviewedTerrazas v. Vance (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1252 · 8 U.S.C. § 1481 (§ 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1503 (§ 360 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Mullaney v. Wilbur · Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation · Addington v. Texas
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 237 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after September 26, 1961 under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this chapter or any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Any person who commits or performs, or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under the provisions of this chapter or any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntarily, but such presumption may be rebutted upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts ... (1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application ... (2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state ... (5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state ...”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A]ny person who commits or performs ... any act of expatriation under the provisions of this or any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntarily, but such a presumption may be rebutted upon a showing by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.