Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

Neutrality

Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court

Definitions from Case Law

From 13 U.S. 359 - The Brig Alerta v. Moran · 1815Most cited · 12 citing opinions

illegal augmentation of belligerent force

A neutral nation may, if so disposed, without a breach of her neutral character, grant permission to both belligerents to equip their vessels of war within her territory. But without such permission the subjects of such belligerent powers have no right to equip vessels of war, or to increase or augment their force, either with arms or with men, within the territory of such neutral nation. Such unauthorized acts violate her sovereignty and her rights as a neutral. All captures made by means of such equipments are illegal in relation to such nation, and it is competent to her Courts to punish the offenders, and, in case the prizes taken by her are brought infra praesidia, to order them to be restored.

How the Supreme Court has restated “Neutrality”

17971800182018401860188019001917 most cited: 13 U.S. 359 - The Brig Alerta v. Moran (1815)
first stateddeparted

Each Supreme Court definition of “Neutrality,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.

How often courts cite the cases defining “Neutrality”

1780180018501900195019705

Court decisions citing the 3 opinions that defined “Neutrality” — 29 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.

All 3 definitions, chronological · 1797–1917

  1. 1797·2 U.S. 270 - Vasse v. Ball[p13]· cited 7×
    ORIGINAL

    If two nations are at war, a neutral power shall not do any act, in favor of the commercial, or military, operations of one of them; or, in other words, it shall not, by treaty, afford a succour, or grant a privilege, which was not stipulated for, previously to the commencement of hostilities.

    rule of

  2. 1917·243 U.S. 124 - The Steamship Appam[p20]· cited 5×

    From the beginning of its history this country has been careful to maintain a neutral position between warring governments, and not to allow the use of its ports in violation of the obligations of neutrality; nor to permit such use beyond the necessities arising from the perils of the seas or the necessities of such vessels as to seaworthiness, provisions, and supplies.

    use of ports