ALBERTO URIBE-TEMBLADOR, APPELLANT-PETITIONER,
v.
GEORGE K. ROSENBERG, DISTRICT DIRECTOR, IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, APPELLEE-RESPONDENT

9th Cir. | 1970-02-05
No. 24407
Before CHAMBERS and ELY, Circuit Judges, and FERGUSON, District Judge.
423 F.2d 717 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1970) Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court affirmed the deportation decision, finding no error in the application of the Nationality Act.


Facts & Procedural History

Petitioner, born in Mexico to an American citizen mother and Mexican father, sought relief from a deportation decision. His eligibility for citizenshi…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The deportation decision brought here for review is affirmed. In our review of the record, we find no error. Petitioner was born in Mexico. His mother was an American citizen who left this country for Mexico when she was five years old. His father was a citizen of Mexico. Intermittently the mother was in and out of the United States. Petitioner’s road to citizenship would be open if the mother had had five out of ten years residence in the United States after she reached 16 years of age.

To give petitioner any relief, we would have to find Section 201(g) of the Nationality Act (54 Stat. 1137, as amended 80 Stat. 1332, 8 U.S.C. § 1401) unconstitutional. This we decline to do. The argument for unconstitutionally has to be that others in only slightly different circumstances are held to be citizens. But in drawing lines, they must be drawn somewhere. And, we cannot say the classifications are so unreasonable as to violate due process in the terms of a statute, assuming that petitioner is entitled thereto.

Petitioner does present a very appealing case. We do express the hope that administratively or legislatively he may somehow gain proper admittance notwithstanding his futile attempt to overstay his temporary admission into this country, unless someone knows something about him that we don’t know.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw