| dbo:abstract
|
- United States v. Sineneng-Smith, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a case of the United States Supreme Court, in which the justices considered the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv), a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 that criminalizes encouraging or inducing illegal immigration. The case attracted attention from civil liberties groups and immigration advocates, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Immigrant Defense Project, and the National Lawyers Guild. The case at lower courts had dealt with potential fraud committed by consultant Evelyn Sineneng-Smith in preparing paperwork for green card certification that she knew would never be approved. While Sineneng-Smith had argued that the basis of the specific clause of the Immigration and National Act violated her First Amendment rights at lower courts, when the case reached the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the judges introduced the idea that the statute of convictions of that clause was overly broad under her First Amendment rights, an issue not brought by either party. The Ninth Circuit subsequently struck down the law as unconstitutional and overturned Sineneng-Smith's conviction. At the Supreme Court, the unanimous decision in May 2020 vacated the Ninth Circuit's decision for violating the principle of party presentation established under Greenlaw v. United States, 554 U.S. 237 (2008). The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit "for reconsideration shorn of the overbreadth inquiry interjected by the appellate panel and bearing a fair resemblance to the case shaped by the parties." (en)
|
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
| dbo:wikiPageID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 12797 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:arguedate
|
- 0001-02-25 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
| dbp:argueyear
| |
| dbp:case
|
- United States v. Sineneng-Smith, (en)
|
| dbp:concurrence
| |
| dbp:decidedate
|
- 0001-05-07 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
| dbp:decideyear
| |
| dbp:docket
| |
| dbp:fullname
|
- United States v. Evelyn Sineneng-Smith (en)
|
| dbp:googlescholar
| |
| dbp:holding
|
- A federal appeals court abuses its discretion when it goes beyond the questions and issues presented by a party. (en)
|
| dbp:joinmajority
| |
| dbp:justia
| |
| dbp:lawsapplied
| |
| dbp:litigants
|
- United States v. Sineneng-Smith (en)
|
| dbp:majority
| |
| dbp:otherSource
| |
| dbp:otherUrl
| |
| dbp:oyez
| |
| dbp:parallelcitations
| |
| dbp:prior
| |
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dcterms:subject
| |
| rdf:type
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- United States v. Sineneng-Smith, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a case of the United States Supreme Court, in which the justices considered the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv), a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 that criminalizes encouraging or inducing illegal immigration. The case attracted attention from civil liberties groups and immigration advocates, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Immigrant Defense Project, and the National Lawyers Guild. (en)
|
| rdfs:label
|
- United States v. Sineneng-Smith (en)
|
| owl:sameAs
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| foaf:name
|
- (en)
- United States v. Evelyn Sineneng-Smith (en)
|
| is dbo:wikiPageRedirects
of | |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
