Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 752 F.2d 1413 - Richards v. Secretary of State, Department of State

Richards v. Secretary of State, Department of State’s Empirical Analysis

752 F.2d 1413 · 1985

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
April 2018
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently April 2018

4 federal appellate · 4 district ·

601985199020002010decided

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

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 877 · 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 Buckley v. Valeo · William Marbury v. James Madison · Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld · Afroyim v. Rusk · 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “If any person who is within the United States claims a right or privilege as a national of the United States and is denied such right or privilege by any department or independent agency, or official thereof, upon the ground that he is not a national of the United States, such person may institute an action under the provisions of [28 U.S.C § 2201] against the head of such department or independent agency for a judgment declaring him to be a national of the United States, ...”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[s]ome expatriating acts may be so inherently inconsistent with United States citizenship that persons performing them may be deemed to intend to relinquish their United States citizenship even in the absence of statements that they so intended the acts, or, indeed, even despite contemporaneous denials that they so intended the acts. Cf. Terrazas, 444 U.S. at 261 , 100 S.Ct. at 545 ; Perez v. Brownell, 356 U.S. 44, 62-84 , 78 S.Ct. 568, 578-89 , 2 L.Ed.2d 603 (1958) (Warren, C.J., dissenting).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A] person’s free choice to renounce his citizenship is effective whatever the motivation. Whether it is done in order to make more money, to advance a career or other relationship, to gain someone’s hand in marriage, or to participate in the political process in the country to which he has moved, a United States citizen’s free choice to renounce his citizenship results in the loss of that citizenship.”
    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.