Terrazas v. Vance’s Empirical Analysis
577 F.2d 7 · 1978
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 2106 · 8 U.S.C. § 1481 (§ 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1501 (§ 358 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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Berenyi v. District Director, Immigration & Naturalization Service · Afroyim v. Rusk · Nishikawa v. Dulles · Perez v. Brownell
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“clear, convincing and unequivocal evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“(a)ssuming that the proper (burden of proof) standards were applied, we are convinced the record fully supports the court's findings.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Terrazas v. Haig“before the mere taking of an oath of allegiance could result in an individual's expatriation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Vance v. Terrazas
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.