8 U.S.C. § 201 to 204
Repealed. June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title IV, § 403(a)(23), (24), 66 Stat. 279, eff. Dec. 24, 1952
8 U.S.C. § 202 has no page of its own: the Office of the Law Revision Counsel prints it together with other sections as the single entry 8 U.S.C. § 201 to 204, shown below.
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25
cases, 1928–1988 · leading case: United States ex rel. Ulrich v. Kellogg, 30 F.2d 984 (D.C. Cir. 1929).
United States ex rel. Ulrich v. Kellogg, 30 F.2d 984 (D.C. Cir. 1929). “And by section 2(f) of the same act it is provided as follows: “No immigration visa shall be issued to an immigrant if it appears to the consular officer, from statements in the application, or in the papers submitted therewith, that the immigrant is inadmissible to the United…”
Goldsmith v. United States, 42 F.2d 133 (2d Cir. 1930). “Section 25 (8 US CA § 223); subdivision (d) of section 2 of the Act of 1924 (8 USCA § 202(d). The Passport Control.Act of 1918, as continued by the Act of March 2,1921, is recognized as an immigration law by section 28, par.”
United States v. Goldsmith, 108 F.2d 917 (2d Cir. 1940). “§ 136 (i) excludes "persons likely to become a public charge" from admission into the United States, and 8 U.S.C.A. § 202 (f) prohibits the issuance of an immigration visa by a consular officer when he knows or has reason to believe that the alien is inadmissible under the…”
Margaret J. Randall v. Edwin Meese, Iii, 854 F.2d 472 (D.C. Cir. 1988). “The Adjustment of Status Regime Before 1935, neither statute nor administrative practice permitted adjustment of the status of an alien already in the United States; to achieve reclassification from nonimmigrant to permanent resident status, the alien had to leave the country…”
North German Lloyd v. Elting, 48 F.2d 547 (2d Cir. 1931). “This requirement was doubtless within the authority of section 2(f), 8 USCA § 202(f), but certainly there is nothing in the statute to support the conclusion that such medical certificates were to relieve the steamship companies of the obligation to make their own examination.”
United States ex rel. Santarelli v. Hughes, 116 F.2d 613 (3d Cir. 1940). “4 8 U.S.C.A. § 202 (a). 5 8 U.S.C.A. § 213 (b); 8 CFR 25.”
United States v. Kusche, 56 F. Supp. 201 (S.D. Cal. 1944). “153 , 8 U.S.C.A. § 202 , which prohibited visa or quota numbers to non-admissible aliens.”
United States v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 26 F.2d 195 (2d Cir. 1928). “Subdivision (f), § 2, of the Act of 1924 (8 USCA § 202(f), provides that a visa shall not issue if it be believed that the alien is inadmissible.”
United States v. Shapiro, 43 F. Supp. 927 (S.D. Cal. 1942). “153 , 8 U. S.C.A. §§ 202, 213. The defendant, therefore, did not legally reside within the United States for one year immediately preceding the filing of her petition for citizenship, and did not legally reside within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the…”
United States v. Mouyas, 42 F.2d 743 (S.D.N.Y. 1930). “The one is mentioned in section 2(d) and the other in section 7(c) of the act (8 USCA §§ 202(d) and 207(e)). When therefore “offenses in connection with documents”- were taken up, why should these apply only to visas and permits? Those constitute a portion only of the…”
Bukta v. Zurbrick, 50 F.2d 593 (6th Cir. 1931). “This warrant of arrest exhibited the same charges finally carried into the deportation warrant.”
Rederiaktiebolaget Nordstjernen v. United States, 61 F.2d 808 (9th Cir. 1932). “153 (8 USCA §§ 202, 210, 213, 216). In so far as material for present consideration, said sections as they appear in the code annotated read: “§ 202.”
8 U.S.C. § 202(a): 2 cases
United States ex rel. Ulrich v. Kellogg, 30 F.2d 984 (D.C. Cir. 1929). “And by section 2(f) of the same act it is provided as follows: “No immigration visa shall be issued to an immigrant if it appears to the consular officer, from statements in the application, or in the papers submitted therewith, that the immigrant is inadmissible to the United…”
Hamburg-Am. Line v. Elting, 73 F.2d 272 (2d Cir. 1934).
8 U.S.C. § 202(b): 1 case
Hamburg-Am. Line v. Elting, 73 F.2d 272 (2d Cir. 1934).
8 U.S.C. § 202(d): 2 cases
Goldsmith v. United States, 42 F.2d 133 (2d Cir. 1930). “Section 25 (8 US CA § 223); subdivision (d) of section 2 of the Act of 1924 (8 USCA § 202(d). The Passport Control.Act of 1918, as continued by the Act of March 2,1921, is recognized as an immigration law by section 28, par.”
United States v. Mouyas, 42 F.2d 743 (S.D.N.Y. 1930). “The one is mentioned in section 2(d) and the other in section 7(c) of the act (8 USCA §§ 202(d) and 207(e)). When therefore “offenses in connection with documents”- were taken up, why should these apply only to visas and permits? Those constitute a portion only of the…”
8 U.S.C. § 202(f): 4 cases
United States ex rel. Ulrich v. Kellogg, 30 F.2d 984 (D.C. Cir. 1929). “And by section 2(f) of the same act it is provided as follows: “No immigration visa shall be issued to an immigrant if it appears to the consular officer, from statements in the application, or in the papers submitted therewith, that the immigrant is inadmissible to the United…”
United States v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 26 F.2d 195 (2d Cir. 1928). “Subdivision (f), § 2, of the Act of 1924 (8 USCA § 202(f), provides that a visa shall not issue if it be believed that the alien is inadmissible.”
Goldsmith v. United States, 42 F.2d 133 (2d Cir. 1930). “Section 25 (8 US CA § 223); subdivision (d) of section 2 of the Act of 1924 (8 USCA § 202(d). The Passport Control.Act of 1918, as continued by the Act of March 2,1921, is recognized as an immigration law by section 28, par.”
North German Lloyd v. Elting, 48 F.2d 547 (2d Cir. 1931). “This requirement was doubtless within the authority of section 2(f), 8 USCA § 202(f), but certainly there is nothing in the statute to support the conclusion that such medical certificates were to relieve the steamship companies of the obligation to make their own examination.”
8 U.S.C. § 202(g): 4 cases
North German Lloyd v. Elting, 48 F.2d 547 (2d Cir. 1931). “This requirement was doubtless within the authority of section 2(f), 8 USCA § 202(f), but certainly there is nothing in the statute to support the conclusion that such medical certificates were to relieve the steamship companies of the obligation to make their own examination.”
Silva v. Tillinghast, 36 F.2d 801 (D. Mass. 1929).
Lloyd Sabaudo Societa Anonima Per Azioni v. Elting, 55 F.2d 1048 (2d Cir. 1932).
Cosulich Societa Triestina Di Navigazione v. Elting, 64 F.2d 95 (2d Cir. 1933).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.