Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

alien enemy

Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court

Definitions from Case Law

From 317 U.S. 69 - Ex parte Kawato · 1942Most cited · 129 citing opinions

common law rule on court access

The ancient rule against suits by resident alien enemies has survived only so far as necessary to prevent use of the courts to accomplish a purpose which might hamper our own war efforts or give aid to the enemy. This may be taken as the sound principle of the common law today.

How the Supreme Court has restated “alien enemy”

17891800185019001942 most cited: 317 U.S. 69 - Ex parte Kawato (1942)
first stateddeparted

Each Supreme Court definition of “alien enemy,” 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 “alien enemy”

178018001850190019502000202063

Court decisions citing the 4 opinions that defined “alien enemy” — 272 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 4 definitions, chronological · 1789–1942

  1. 1789·2 U.S. 102 - Hoare v. Allen[p5]· cited 5×
    ORIGINAL

    For the term of 7 1-2 years, viz. from the 10th September, 1775, to the 10th March, 1783, the defendant could not have paid this money to the plaintiff, who was an alien enemy, without a violation of the positive laws of this country, and of the laws of nations.

  2. 1857·61 U.S. 235 - White v. Burnley[p120]· cited 32×

    When one nation is at war with another nation, all the subjects or citizens of the one are deemed in hostility to the subjects or citizens of the other; they are personally at war with each other, and have no capacity to contract.

  3. whatever may be the extent of the disability of an alien enemy to sue in the courts of the hostile country, it is clear that he is liable to be sued, and this carries with it the right to use all the means and appliances of defence.

    right to defend