8 U.S.C. § 3
SPECIAL CONSIDERATION CONCERNING CIVICS REQUIREMENT FOR CERTAIN ALIENS WHO SERVED WITH SPECIAL GUERRILLA UNITS OR IRREGULAR FORCES IN LAOS.
“The Attorney General shall provide for special consideration, as determined by the Attorney General, concerning the requirement of paragraph (2) of section 312(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1423(a)(2)) with respect to the naturalization of any person described in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 2 of this Act.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1927–2025 · leading case: Cohen v. Little Six, Inc.
Cohen v. Little Six, Inc. (1996)
“253 , 8 U.S.C. § 3 , (now included in 8 U.S.C. § 1401 ).”
United States v. Pruitt (2016)
“□ ForotherofTensesforwhichrestitutionisauthorizedunderl8U.S.C §3(fó3 and/or required by the sentencing guidelines, restitution is not ordered because the complication and prolongation of the sentencing process resulting from the fashioning of a restitution order outweigh the…”
Morrison v. California (1934)
“Foerster, The Racial Problems involved in Immigration from Latin America and the West Indies to the United States, Report to Secretary of Labor, 1925, pp.”
People v. Carmen (1954)
“§ 1401 , formerly 8 U.S.C.A. § 3 .) Accordingly, all such Indians are citizens of the state in which they reside.”
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ETC. v. Seber (1942)
“253 , 8 U.S.C.A. § 3 , as a climax of such purpose, provides: "All Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States are declared to be citizens of the United States.”
Trujillo v. Prince (1938)
“Each resided on the Nambe Indian reservation in New Mexico and by the effect of congressional enactment are citizens of the United States, 8 U.S.C.A. § 3 . It is charged that decedent, while driving an automobile on a public highway, was killed by a wrongful act of the defendant.”
Harrison v. Laveen (1948)
“253 , declared all Indians to be citizens of the United States, 8 U.S.C.A. § 3 , and then, just prior to World War II, on October 14, 1940, enacted the “Nationality Act of 1940”, U.”
Begay v. Miller (1950)
“253 , Title 8 U.S.C.A. §§ 3 and 601 note, it would deprive Alice Begay, wife of petitioner, of her rights under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution to hold that she could not go into the superior court and have her marital rights…”
Ex Parte Green (1941)
“253 , 8 U.S.C.A. § 3 , and by the Nationality Act of 1940, 54 Stat.”
Acosta v. County of San Diego (1954)
“253, 8 U.S.C.A. § 3 ) is not determinative of the question of residence and does not deprive the United States government of its power or duty toward the Indians, citing United States v.”
United States v. Native Village (1969)
“253 , formerly 8 U.S.C. §3 provided: That all non-citizen Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States be, and they are hereby, declared to be citizens of the United States * * *.”
Deere v. State of New York (1927)
“But since the enactment of the Act of June 2, 1924 (8 USCA § 3), making citizens of all Indians, there would seem to be little doubt that an Indian citizen may maintain an action in the federal courts.”
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.