Edit count of the user (user_editcount) | 35 |
Name of the user account (user_name) | 'Moosey98' |
Age of the user account (user_age) | 8298540 |
Groups (including implicit) the user is in (user_groups) | [
0 => '*',
1 => 'user',
2 => 'autoconfirmed'
] |
Rights that the user has (user_rights) | [
0 => 'createaccount',
1 => 'read',
2 => 'edit',
3 => 'createtalk',
4 => 'writeapi',
5 => 'viewmyprivateinfo',
6 => 'editmyprivateinfo',
7 => 'editmyoptions',
8 => 'abusefilter-log-detail',
9 => 'urlshortener-create-url',
10 => 'centralauth-merge',
11 => 'abusefilter-view',
12 => 'abusefilter-log',
13 => 'vipsscaler-test',
14 => 'collectionsaveasuserpage',
15 => 'reupload-own',
16 => 'move-rootuserpages',
17 => 'createpage',
18 => 'minoredit',
19 => 'editmyusercss',
20 => 'editmyuserjson',
21 => 'editmyuserjs',
22 => 'sendemail',
23 => 'applychangetags',
24 => 'viewmywatchlist',
25 => 'editmywatchlist',
26 => 'spamblacklistlog',
27 => 'mwoauthmanagemygrants',
28 => 'reupload',
29 => 'upload',
30 => 'move',
31 => 'autoconfirmed',
32 => 'editsemiprotected',
33 => 'skipcaptcha',
34 => 'ipinfo',
35 => 'ipinfo-view-basic',
36 => 'transcode-reset',
37 => 'transcode-status',
38 => 'createpagemainns',
39 => 'movestable',
40 => 'autoreview'
] |
Whether or not a user is editing through the mobile interface (user_mobile) | false |
Whether the user is editing from mobile app (user_app) | false |
Page ID (page_id) | 0 |
Page namespace (page_namespace) | 0 |
Page title without namespace (page_title) | 'United States v. Manzi' |
Full page title (page_prefixedtitle) | 'United States v. Manzi' |
Edit protection level of the page (page_restrictions_edit) | [] |
Page age in seconds (page_age) | 0 |
Action (action) | 'edit' |
Edit summary/reason (summary) | 'Created page' |
Time since last page edit in seconds (page_last_edit_age) | null |
Old content model (old_content_model) | '' |
New content model (new_content_model) | 'wikitext' |
Old page wikitext, before the edit (old_wikitext) | '' |
New page wikitext, after the edit (new_wikitext) | '{{Infobox US Supreme Court case
| Litigants = United States v. Manzi
| ArgueDate = February 23
| ArgueYear = 1928
| DecideDate = April 9
| DecideYear = 1928
| FullName = United States v. Amalia Manzi
| USVol = 276
| USPage = 463
| Docket = 204
| Prior = United States v. Manzi, 16 F.2d 884 (1st Cir. 1926)
| Holding = A widow of an alien who died after declaring his intent to become a citizen, but before being naturalized, must file her petition within the time frame set by law to receive the benefits of citizenship.
| Majority = McReynolds
| JoinMajority = Brandeis, Devanter, Holmes, Stone, McKenna, Taft
| Dissent = Sutherland, Sanford
| LawsApplied = [[Naturalization Act of 1906]]
}}
'''United States v. Manzi''', 276 [[United States Reports|U.S.]] 463 (1928), was a [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]]<nowiki/>case in which the Court ruled that in order to receive the full benefits of citizenship, the widow of an alien who passed away after declaring his intent to become a citizen, but before being naturalized, must file her petition within the time frame set by law, at the time being 7 years after the declaration of intent was filed. This case established that when applying for citizenship, the action undertaken by an alien to become naturalized is to be understood to also be "as though taken by the widow herself."
== Historical Context ==
This case begins with Aniello Manzi, an alien who had been undergoing the naturalization process who further filed a declaration of intention to become a citizen on October 15, 1913.<ref name=":0">{{cite web |last1=McReynolds |first1=James Clark |title=Majority Opinion - United States v. Manzi, 276 U.S. 463 (1928) |url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/276/463/ |website=supreme.justia.com |access-date=1 May 2024 |date=9 April 1928}}</ref> Aniello however died on December 19, 1914, before he was finally naturalized as a citizen. This left his wife, Amalia Manzi widowed and ultimately without citizenship. Over 10 years after her husband's declaration of intention, on October 4, 1924, Manzi using the declaration filed a petition for citizenship. She eventually did receive citizenship, and was fully naturalized on February 13, 1925, even over an objection from the government stating her petition was too late.
On January 9, 1926, [[John S. Murdock]], the [[United States Attorney|U.S. Attorney]] for the [[District of Rhode Island]] filed a petition for the cancellation of Manzi's naturalization certificate on the grounds it had been "illegally procured".<ref name=":1">{{cite web |last1=Anderson |first1=George Weston |title=Majority Opinion - United States v. Manzi, 16 F.2d 884 (1st Cir. 1926) |url=https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-manzi-2 |website=casetext.com |access-date=1 May 2024 |date=31 December 1926}}</ref> The District Court dismissed the case without an official opinion. The United States appealed to the [[United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit|U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit]].
=== Court of Appeals ===
The Court of Appeals heard the case, and as noted by the Court, Manzi neither filed a brief nor showed up for oral arguments, leaving the United States as the sole "voice" in the case. Despite this, in a majority opinion written by Judge [[George W. Anderson (judge)|Georgia W. Anderson]], of which Judge [[George Hutchins Bingham|George H. Bingham]] and Judge [[Charles F. Johnson]] concurred, the Court rejected the historical arguments raised by the United States.<ref name=":1" /> With this, the United States once again appealed, this time to the United States Supreme Court.
== United States Supreme Court ==
[[File:McREYNOLDS, J.C. JUSTICE LCCN2016857877 – unframed.jpg|thumb|Justice Edward C. McReynolds, who wrote the majority opinion.]]
The Supreme Court in this case granted certiorari, and held oral arguments on February 23, 1928, and handed down its decision on April 9. Justice [[James Clark McReynolds|James C. McReynolds]] wrote the majority opinion for the 7-9 Court in favor of the United States, with Justice [[George Sutherland]] and Justice [[Edward Terry Sanford|Edward T. Sanford]] dissenting.<ref name=":0" /> The opinion reversed the judgement of the Court of Appeals in dismissing the United States' petition for a cancellation of Manzi's certificate of naturalization. Of note, Manzi once again failed to seek representation in this case for purpose of briefs or oral arguments.
In its opinion, the Court firstly promulgated its belief that an application for citizenship within a marriage is sort of a simultaneous process, and thus the husband and wife are both subject to the same regulations and restrictions as prescribed by naturalization law. The entirety of this case was based off the [[Naturalization Act of 1906]] and its provisions. The specific provision in question is as follows:<blockquote>"Section 2. Not less than two years nor more than seven years after he has made such declaration of intention, he shall make and file, in duplicate, a petition in writing...
Section 6. When any alien who had declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States dies before he is actually naturalized, the widow and minor children of such alien may, by complying with the other provisions of this Act, be naturalized without making any declaration of intention."<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>The court goes on to recognize the very specific requirements of the act, stating a widow may "obtain naturalization without her personal declaration of intention, [although] she must comply with all other prerequisites." The Court seemingly wished to air on the caution when dealing with naturalization law, stating,<blockquote>"Citizenship is a high privilege, and when doubts exist concerning a grant of it, generally, at least, they should be resolved in favor of the United States and against the claimant."</blockquote>
==== Dissent ====
Although Justice Sutherland and Justice Sanford dissented, the published opinion did not contain a dissent in writing, nor any reasoning for why they dissented.
== References ==
<references />
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Taft Court]]
[[Category:United States immigration law]]
[[Category:1928 in United States case law]]' |
Unified diff of changes made by edit (edit_diff) | '@@ -1,0 +1,44 @@
+{{Infobox US Supreme Court case
+| Litigants = United States v. Manzi
+| ArgueDate = February 23
+| ArgueYear = 1928
+| DecideDate = April 9
+| DecideYear = 1928
+| FullName = United States v. Amalia Manzi
+| USVol = 276
+| USPage = 463
+| Docket = 204
+| Prior = United States v. Manzi, 16 F.2d 884 (1st Cir. 1926)
+| Holding = A widow of an alien who died after declaring his intent to become a citizen, but before being naturalized, must file her petition within the time frame set by law to receive the benefits of citizenship.
+| Majority = McReynolds
+| JoinMajority = Brandeis, Devanter, Holmes, Stone, McKenna, Taft
+| Dissent = Sutherland, Sanford
+| LawsApplied = [[Naturalization Act of 1906]]
+}}
+
+'''United States v. Manzi''', 276 [[United States Reports|U.S.]] 463 (1928), was a [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]]<nowiki/>case in which the Court ruled that in order to receive the full benefits of citizenship, the widow of an alien who passed away after declaring his intent to become a citizen, but before being naturalized, must file her petition within the time frame set by law, at the time being 7 years after the declaration of intent was filed. This case established that when applying for citizenship, the action undertaken by an alien to become naturalized is to be understood to also be "as though taken by the widow herself."
+
+== Historical Context ==
+This case begins with Aniello Manzi, an alien who had been undergoing the naturalization process who further filed a declaration of intention to become a citizen on October 15, 1913.<ref name=":0">{{cite web |last1=McReynolds |first1=James Clark |title=Majority Opinion - United States v. Manzi, 276 U.S. 463 (1928) |url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/276/463/ |website=supreme.justia.com |access-date=1 May 2024 |date=9 April 1928}}</ref> Aniello however died on December 19, 1914, before he was finally naturalized as a citizen. This left his wife, Amalia Manzi widowed and ultimately without citizenship. Over 10 years after her husband's declaration of intention, on October 4, 1924, Manzi using the declaration filed a petition for citizenship. She eventually did receive citizenship, and was fully naturalized on February 13, 1925, even over an objection from the government stating her petition was too late.
+
+On January 9, 1926, [[John S. Murdock]], the [[United States Attorney|U.S. Attorney]] for the [[District of Rhode Island]] filed a petition for the cancellation of Manzi's naturalization certificate on the grounds it had been "illegally procured".<ref name=":1">{{cite web |last1=Anderson |first1=George Weston |title=Majority Opinion - United States v. Manzi, 16 F.2d 884 (1st Cir. 1926) |url=https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-manzi-2 |website=casetext.com |access-date=1 May 2024 |date=31 December 1926}}</ref> The District Court dismissed the case without an official opinion. The United States appealed to the [[United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit|U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit]].
+
+=== Court of Appeals ===
+The Court of Appeals heard the case, and as noted by the Court, Manzi neither filed a brief nor showed up for oral arguments, leaving the United States as the sole "voice" in the case. Despite this, in a majority opinion written by Judge [[George W. Anderson (judge)|Georgia W. Anderson]], of which Judge [[George Hutchins Bingham|George H. Bingham]] and Judge [[Charles F. Johnson]] concurred, the Court rejected the historical arguments raised by the United States.<ref name=":1" /> With this, the United States once again appealed, this time to the United States Supreme Court.
+
+== United States Supreme Court ==
+[[File:McREYNOLDS, J.C. JUSTICE LCCN2016857877 – unframed.jpg|thumb|Justice Edward C. McReynolds, who wrote the majority opinion.]]
+The Supreme Court in this case granted certiorari, and held oral arguments on February 23, 1928, and handed down its decision on April 9. Justice [[James Clark McReynolds|James C. McReynolds]] wrote the majority opinion for the 7-9 Court in favor of the United States, with Justice [[George Sutherland]] and Justice [[Edward Terry Sanford|Edward T. Sanford]] dissenting.<ref name=":0" /> The opinion reversed the judgement of the Court of Appeals in dismissing the United States' petition for a cancellation of Manzi's certificate of naturalization. Of note, Manzi once again failed to seek representation in this case for purpose of briefs or oral arguments.
+
+In its opinion, the Court firstly promulgated its belief that an application for citizenship within a marriage is sort of a simultaneous process, and thus the husband and wife are both subject to the same regulations and restrictions as prescribed by naturalization law. The entirety of this case was based off the [[Naturalization Act of 1906]] and its provisions. The specific provision in question is as follows:<blockquote>"Section 2. Not less than two years nor more than seven years after he has made such declaration of intention, he shall make and file, in duplicate, a petition in writing...
+
+Section 6. When any alien who had declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States dies before he is actually naturalized, the widow and minor children of such alien may, by complying with the other provisions of this Act, be naturalized without making any declaration of intention."<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>The court goes on to recognize the very specific requirements of the act, stating a widow may "obtain naturalization without her personal declaration of intention, [although] she must comply with all other prerequisites." The Court seemingly wished to air on the caution when dealing with naturalization law, stating,<blockquote>"Citizenship is a high privilege, and when doubts exist concerning a grant of it, generally, at least, they should be resolved in favor of the United States and against the claimant."</blockquote>
+
+==== Dissent ====
+Although Justice Sutherland and Justice Sanford dissented, the published opinion did not contain a dissent in writing, nor any reasoning for why they dissented.
+
+== References ==
+<references />
+[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Taft Court]]
+[[Category:United States immigration law]]
+[[Category:1928 in United States case law]]
' |
New page size (new_size) | 6292 |
Old page size (old_size) | 0 |
Size change in edit (edit_delta) | 6292 |
Lines added in edit (added_lines) | [
0 => '{{Infobox US Supreme Court case',
1 => '| Litigants = United States v. Manzi',
2 => '| ArgueDate = February 23',
3 => '| ArgueYear = 1928',
4 => '| DecideDate = April 9',
5 => '| DecideYear = 1928',
6 => '| FullName = United States v. Amalia Manzi',
7 => '| USVol = 276',
8 => '| USPage = 463',
9 => '| Docket = 204',
10 => '| Prior = United States v. Manzi, 16 F.2d 884 (1st Cir. 1926)',
11 => '| Holding = A widow of an alien who died after declaring his intent to become a citizen, but before being naturalized, must file her petition within the time frame set by law to receive the benefits of citizenship.',
12 => '| Majority = McReynolds',
13 => '| JoinMajority = Brandeis, Devanter, Holmes, Stone, McKenna, Taft',
14 => '| Dissent = Sutherland, Sanford',
15 => '| LawsApplied = [[Naturalization Act of 1906]]',
16 => '}}',
17 => '',
18 => ''''United States v. Manzi''', 276 [[United States Reports|U.S.]] 463 (1928), was a [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]]<nowiki/>case in which the Court ruled that in order to receive the full benefits of citizenship, the widow of an alien who passed away after declaring his intent to become a citizen, but before being naturalized, must file her petition within the time frame set by law, at the time being 7 years after the declaration of intent was filed. This case established that when applying for citizenship, the action undertaken by an alien to become naturalized is to be understood to also be "as though taken by the widow herself." ',
19 => '',
20 => '== Historical Context ==',
21 => 'This case begins with Aniello Manzi, an alien who had been undergoing the naturalization process who further filed a declaration of intention to become a citizen on October 15, 1913.<ref name=":0">{{cite web |last1=McReynolds |first1=James Clark |title=Majority Opinion - United States v. Manzi, 276 U.S. 463 (1928) |url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/276/463/ |website=supreme.justia.com |access-date=1 May 2024 |date=9 April 1928}}</ref> Aniello however died on December 19, 1914, before he was finally naturalized as a citizen. This left his wife, Amalia Manzi widowed and ultimately without citizenship. Over 10 years after her husband's declaration of intention, on October 4, 1924, Manzi using the declaration filed a petition for citizenship. She eventually did receive citizenship, and was fully naturalized on February 13, 1925, even over an objection from the government stating her petition was too late.',
22 => '',
23 => 'On January 9, 1926, [[John S. Murdock]], the [[United States Attorney|U.S. Attorney]] for the [[District of Rhode Island]] filed a petition for the cancellation of Manzi's naturalization certificate on the grounds it had been "illegally procured".<ref name=":1">{{cite web |last1=Anderson |first1=George Weston |title=Majority Opinion - United States v. Manzi, 16 F.2d 884 (1st Cir. 1926) |url=https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-manzi-2 |website=casetext.com |access-date=1 May 2024 |date=31 December 1926}}</ref> The District Court dismissed the case without an official opinion. The United States appealed to the [[United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit|U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit]].',
24 => '',
25 => '=== Court of Appeals ===',
26 => 'The Court of Appeals heard the case, and as noted by the Court, Manzi neither filed a brief nor showed up for oral arguments, leaving the United States as the sole "voice" in the case. Despite this, in a majority opinion written by Judge [[George W. Anderson (judge)|Georgia W. Anderson]], of which Judge [[George Hutchins Bingham|George H. Bingham]] and Judge [[Charles F. Johnson]] concurred, the Court rejected the historical arguments raised by the United States.<ref name=":1" /> With this, the United States once again appealed, this time to the United States Supreme Court.',
27 => '',
28 => '== United States Supreme Court ==',
29 => '[[File:McREYNOLDS, J.C. JUSTICE LCCN2016857877 – unframed.jpg|thumb|Justice Edward C. McReynolds, who wrote the majority opinion.]]',
30 => 'The Supreme Court in this case granted certiorari, and held oral arguments on February 23, 1928, and handed down its decision on April 9. Justice [[James Clark McReynolds|James C. McReynolds]] wrote the majority opinion for the 7-9 Court in favor of the United States, with Justice [[George Sutherland]] and Justice [[Edward Terry Sanford|Edward T. Sanford]] dissenting.<ref name=":0" /> The opinion reversed the judgement of the Court of Appeals in dismissing the United States' petition for a cancellation of Manzi's certificate of naturalization. Of note, Manzi once again failed to seek representation in this case for purpose of briefs or oral arguments.',
31 => '',
32 => 'In its opinion, the Court firstly promulgated its belief that an application for citizenship within a marriage is sort of a simultaneous process, and thus the husband and wife are both subject to the same regulations and restrictions as prescribed by naturalization law. The entirety of this case was based off the [[Naturalization Act of 1906]] and its provisions. The specific provision in question is as follows:<blockquote>"Section 2. Not less than two years nor more than seven years after he has made such declaration of intention, he shall make and file, in duplicate, a petition in writing...',
33 => '',
34 => 'Section 6. When any alien who had declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States dies before he is actually naturalized, the widow and minor children of such alien may, by complying with the other provisions of this Act, be naturalized without making any declaration of intention."<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>The court goes on to recognize the very specific requirements of the act, stating a widow may "obtain naturalization without her personal declaration of intention, [although] she must comply with all other prerequisites." The Court seemingly wished to air on the caution when dealing with naturalization law, stating,<blockquote>"Citizenship is a high privilege, and when doubts exist concerning a grant of it, generally, at least, they should be resolved in favor of the United States and against the claimant."</blockquote>',
35 => '',
36 => '==== Dissent ====',
37 => 'Although Justice Sutherland and Justice Sanford dissented, the published opinion did not contain a dissent in writing, nor any reasoning for why they dissented.',
38 => '',
39 => '== References ==',
40 => '<references />',
41 => '[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Taft Court]]',
42 => '[[Category:United States immigration law]]',
43 => '[[Category:1928 in United States case law]]'
] |
Lines removed in edit (removed_lines) | [] |
Parsed HTML source of the new revision (new_html) | '<div class="mw-content-ltr mw-parser-output" lang="en" dir="ltr"><div class="shortdescription nomobile noexcerpt noprint searchaux" style="display:none">1928 United States Supreme Court case</div><style data-mw-deduplicate="TemplateStyles:r1218072481">.mw-parser-output .infobox-subbox{padding:0;border:none;margin:-3px;width:auto;min-width:100%;font-size:100%;clear:none;float:none;background-color:transparent}.mw-parser-output .infobox-3cols-child{margin:auto}.mw-parser-output .infobox .navbar{font-size:100%}body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output .infobox-header,body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output .infobox-subheader,body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output .infobox-above,body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output .infobox-title,body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output .infobox-image,body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output .infobox-full-data,body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output .infobox-below{text-align:center}html.skin-theme-clientpref-night .mw-parser-output .infobox-full-data div{background:#1f1f23!important;color:#f8f9fa}@media(prefers-color-scheme:dark){html.skin-theme-clientpref-os .mw-parser-output .infobox-full-data div{background:#1f1f23!important;color:#f8f9fa}}</style><table class="infobox scotus" style="line-height: 1.4em"><tbody><tr><th colspan="2" class="infobox-above fn" style="background-color: #99c0ff; padding: 0.2em; line-height: 1.4em; font-size:125%; font-style: italic">United States v. Manzi</th></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="infobox-image"><span typeof="mw:File"><span title="Seal of the United States Supreme Court"><img alt="" src="/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Seal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court.svg/100px-Seal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court.svg.png" decoding="async" width="100" height="100" class="mw-file-element" srcset="/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Seal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court.svg/150px-Seal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court.svg.png 1.5x, /upwiki/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Seal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court.svg/200px-Seal_of_the_United_States_Supreme_Court.svg.png 2x" data-file-width="720" data-file-height="720" /></span></span><div class="infobox-caption" style="padding-top: 0.5em; font-weight: bold"><a href="/enwiki/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States" title="Supreme Court of the United States">Supreme Court of the United States</a></div></td></tr><tr><th colspan="2" class="infobox-header" style="background-color: #99c0ff; white-space:nowrap">Argued February 23, 1928<br />Decided April 9, 1928</th></tr><tr><th scope="row" class="infobox-label">Full case name</th><td class="infobox-data"><i>United States v. Amalia Manzi</i></td></tr><tr><th scope="row" class="infobox-label">Docket no.</th><td class="infobox-data"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/204.html">204</a></td></tr><tr><th scope="row" class="infobox-label">Citations</th><td class="infobox-data">276 <a href="/enwiki/wiki/United_States_Reports" title="United States Reports">U.S.</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="https://supreme.justia.com/us/276/463/case.html">463</a> (<i><a href="/enwiki/wiki/List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases,_volume_276" title="List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 276">more</a></i>)<div></div></td></tr><tr><th colspan="2" class="infobox-header" style="background-color: #99c0ff; white-space:nowrap">Case history</th></tr><tr><th scope="row" class="infobox-label">Prior</th><td class="infobox-data">United States v. Manzi, 16 F.2d 884 (1st Cir. 1926)</td></tr><tr><th colspan="2" class="infobox-header" style="background-color: #99c0ff; white-space:nowrap">Holding</th></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="infobox-full-data">A widow of an alien who died after declaring his intent to become a citizen, but before being naturalized, must file her petition within the time frame set by law to receive the benefits of citizenship.</td></tr><tr><th colspan="2" class="infobox-header" style="background-color: #99c0ff; white-space:nowrap">Court membership</th></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="infobox-full-data"><dl style="margin:0; padding:0.1em 0.5em; text-align:center; line-height:1.3em;">
<dt style="margin:0;">Chief Justice</dt>
<dd style="margin:0 0 0.3em;"><a href="/enwiki/wiki/William_Howard_Taft" title="William Howard Taft">William H. Taft</a>
</dd>
<dt style="margin:0;">Associate Justices</dt>
<dd style="margin:0;"><a href="/enwiki/wiki/Oliver_Wendell_Holmes_Jr." title="Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.">Oliver W. Holmes Jr.</a> <b>·</b>  <a href="/enwiki/wiki/Willis_Van_Devanter" title="Willis Van Devanter">Willis Van Devanter</a><br /><a href="/enwiki/wiki/James_Clark_McReynolds" title="James Clark McReynolds">James C. McReynolds</a> <b>·</b>  <a href="/enwiki/wiki/Louis_Brandeis" title="Louis Brandeis">Louis Brandeis</a><br /><a href="/enwiki/wiki/George_Sutherland" title="George Sutherland">George Sutherland</a> <b>·</b>  <a href="/enwiki/wiki/Pierce_Butler_(justice)" class="mw-redirect" title="Pierce Butler (justice)">Pierce Butler</a><br /><a href="/enwiki/wiki/Edward_Terry_Sanford" title="Edward Terry Sanford">Edward T. Sanford</a> <b>·</b>  <a href="/enwiki/wiki/Harlan_F._Stone" title="Harlan F. Stone">Harlan F. Stone</a>
</dd></dl></td></tr><tr><th colspan="2" class="infobox-header" style="background-color: #99c0ff; white-space:nowrap">Case opinions</th></tr><tr><th scope="row" class="infobox-label">Majority</th><td class="infobox-data">McReynolds, joined by Brandeis, Devanter, Holmes, Stone, McKenna, Taft</td></tr><tr><th scope="row" class="infobox-label">Dissent</th><td class="infobox-data">Sutherland, Sanford</td></tr><tr><th colspan="2" class="infobox-header" style="background-color: #99c0ff; white-space:nowrap">Laws applied</th></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="infobox-full-data"><a href="/enwiki/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1906" title="Naturalization Act of 1906">Naturalization Act of 1906</a></td></tr></tbody></table>
<p><b>United States v. Manzi</b>, 276 <a href="/enwiki/wiki/United_States_Reports" title="United States Reports">U.S.</a> 463 (1928), was a <a href="/enwiki/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States" title="Supreme Court of the United States">Supreme Court</a>case in which the Court ruled that in order to receive the full benefits of citizenship, the widow of an alien who passed away after declaring his intent to become a citizen, but before being naturalized, must file her petition within the time frame set by law, at the time being 7 years after the declaration of intent was filed. This case established that when applying for citizenship, the action undertaken by an alien to become naturalized is to be understood to also be "as though taken by the widow herself."
</p>
<div id="toc" class="toc" role="navigation" aria-labelledby="mw-toc-heading"><input type="checkbox" role="button" id="toctogglecheckbox" class="toctogglecheckbox" style="display:none" /><div class="toctitle" lang="en" dir="ltr"><h2 id="mw-toc-heading">Contents</h2><span class="toctogglespan"><label class="toctogglelabel" for="toctogglecheckbox"></label></span></div>
<ul>
<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1"><a href="#Historical_Context"><span class="tocnumber">1</span> <span class="toctext">Historical Context</span></a>
<ul>
<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-2"><a href="#Court_of_Appeals"><span class="tocnumber">1.1</span> <span class="toctext">Court of Appeals</span></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3"><a href="#United_States_Supreme_Court"><span class="tocnumber">2</span> <span class="toctext">United States Supreme Court</span></a>
<ul>
<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-4"><a href="#Dissent"><span class="tocnumber">2.1</span> <span class="toctext">Dissent</span></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-5"><a href="#References"><span class="tocnumber">3</span> <span class="toctext">References</span></a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Historical_Context">Historical Context</span><span class="mw-editsection"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">[</span><a href="/enwiki/w/index.php?title=United_States_v._Manzi&action=edit&section=1" title="Edit section: Historical Context"><span>edit</span></a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">]</span></span></h2>
<p>This case begins with Aniello Manzi, an alien who had been undergoing the naturalization process who further filed a declaration of intention to become a citizen on October 15, 1913.<sup id="cite_ref-:0_1-0" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-:0-1">[1]</a></sup> Aniello however died on December 19, 1914, before he was finally naturalized as a citizen. This left his wife, Amalia Manzi widowed and ultimately without citizenship. Over 10 years after her husband's declaration of intention, on October 4, 1924, Manzi using the declaration filed a petition for citizenship. She eventually did receive citizenship, and was fully naturalized on February 13, 1925, even over an objection from the government stating her petition was too late.
</p><p>On January 9, 1926, <a href="/enwiki/wiki/John_S._Murdock" title="John S. Murdock">John S. Murdock</a>, the <a href="/enwiki/wiki/United_States_Attorney" title="United States Attorney">U.S. Attorney</a> for the <a href="/enwiki/wiki/District_of_Rhode_Island" class="mw-redirect" title="District of Rhode Island">District of Rhode Island</a> filed a petition for the cancellation of Manzi's naturalization certificate on the grounds it had been "illegally procured".<sup id="cite_ref-:1_2-0" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-:1-2">[2]</a></sup> The District Court dismissed the case without an official opinion. The United States appealed to the <a href="/enwiki/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_First_Circuit" title="United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit">U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit</a>.
</p>
<h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Court_of_Appeals">Court of Appeals</span><span class="mw-editsection"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">[</span><a href="/enwiki/w/index.php?title=United_States_v._Manzi&action=edit&section=2" title="Edit section: Court of Appeals"><span>edit</span></a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">]</span></span></h3>
<p>The Court of Appeals heard the case, and as noted by the Court, Manzi neither filed a brief nor showed up for oral arguments, leaving the United States as the sole "voice" in the case. Despite this, in a majority opinion written by Judge <a href="/enwiki/wiki/George_W._Anderson_(judge)" title="George W. Anderson (judge)">Georgia W. Anderson</a>, of which Judge <a href="/enwiki/wiki/George_Hutchins_Bingham" title="George Hutchins Bingham">George H. Bingham</a> and Judge <a href="/enwiki/wiki/Charles_F._Johnson" title="Charles F. Johnson">Charles F. Johnson</a> concurred, the Court rejected the historical arguments raised by the United States.<sup id="cite_ref-:1_2-1" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-:1-2">[2]</a></sup> With this, the United States once again appealed, this time to the United States Supreme Court.
</p>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="United_States_Supreme_Court">United States Supreme Court</span><span class="mw-editsection"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">[</span><a href="/enwiki/w/index.php?title=United_States_v._Manzi&action=edit&section=3" title="Edit section: United States Supreme Court"><span>edit</span></a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">]</span></span></h2>
<figure class="mw-default-size" typeof="mw:File/Thumb"><a href="/enwiki/wiki/File:McREYNOLDS,_J.C._JUSTICE_LCCN2016857877_%E2%80%93_unframed.jpg" class="mw-file-description"><img src="/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/McREYNOLDS%2C_J.C._JUSTICE_LCCN2016857877_%E2%80%93_unframed.jpg/220px-McREYNOLDS%2C_J.C._JUSTICE_LCCN2016857877_%E2%80%93_unframed.jpg" decoding="async" width="220" height="269" class="mw-file-element" srcset="/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/McREYNOLDS%2C_J.C._JUSTICE_LCCN2016857877_%E2%80%93_unframed.jpg/330px-McREYNOLDS%2C_J.C._JUSTICE_LCCN2016857877_%E2%80%93_unframed.jpg 1.5x, /upwiki/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/McREYNOLDS%2C_J.C._JUSTICE_LCCN2016857877_%E2%80%93_unframed.jpg/440px-McREYNOLDS%2C_J.C._JUSTICE_LCCN2016857877_%E2%80%93_unframed.jpg 2x" data-file-width="729" data-file-height="890" /></a><figcaption>Justice Edward C. McReynolds, who wrote the majority opinion.</figcaption></figure>
<p>The Supreme Court in this case granted certiorari, and held oral arguments on February 23, 1928, and handed down its decision on April 9. Justice <a href="/enwiki/wiki/James_Clark_McReynolds" title="James Clark McReynolds">James C. McReynolds</a> wrote the majority opinion for the 7-9 Court in favor of the United States, with Justice <a href="/enwiki/wiki/George_Sutherland" title="George Sutherland">George Sutherland</a> and Justice <a href="/enwiki/wiki/Edward_Terry_Sanford" title="Edward Terry Sanford">Edward T. Sanford</a> dissenting.<sup id="cite_ref-:0_1-1" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-:0-1">[1]</a></sup> The opinion reversed the judgement of the Court of Appeals in dismissing the United States' petition for a cancellation of Manzi's certificate of naturalization. Of note, Manzi once again failed to seek representation in this case for purpose of briefs or oral arguments.
</p><p>
In its opinion, the Court firstly promulgated its belief that an application for citizenship within a marriage is sort of a simultaneous process, and thus the husband and wife are both subject to the same regulations and restrictions as prescribed by naturalization law. The entirety of this case was based off the <a href="/enwiki/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1906" title="Naturalization Act of 1906">Naturalization Act of 1906</a> and its provisions. The specific provision in question is as follows:</p><blockquote><p>"Section 2. Not less than two years nor more than seven years after he has made such declaration of intention, he shall make and file, in duplicate, a petition in writing...
Section 6. When any alien who had declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States dies before he is actually naturalized, the widow and minor children of such alien may, by complying with the other provisions of this Act, be naturalized without making any declaration of intention."<sup id="cite_ref-:0_1-2" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-:0-1">[1]</a></sup></p></blockquote><p>The court goes on to recognize the very specific requirements of the act, stating a widow may "obtain naturalization without her personal declaration of intention, [although] she must comply with all other prerequisites." The Court seemingly wished to air on the caution when dealing with naturalization law, stating,</p><blockquote><p>"Citizenship is a high privilege, and when doubts exist concerning a grant of it, generally, at least, they should be resolved in favor of the United States and against the claimant."</p></blockquote>
<h4><span class="mw-headline" id="Dissent">Dissent</span><span class="mw-editsection"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">[</span><a href="/enwiki/w/index.php?title=United_States_v._Manzi&action=edit&section=4" title="Edit section: Dissent"><span>edit</span></a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">]</span></span></h4>
<p>Although Justice Sutherland and Justice Sanford dissented, the published opinion did not contain a dissent in writing, nor any reasoning for why they dissented.
</p>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="References">References</span><span class="mw-editsection"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">[</span><a href="/enwiki/w/index.php?title=United_States_v._Manzi&action=edit&section=5" title="Edit section: References"><span>edit</span></a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket">]</span></span></h2>
<div class="mw-references-wrap"><ol class="references">
<li id="cite_note-:0-1"><span class="mw-cite-backlink">^ <a href="#cite_ref-:0_1-0"><sup><i><b>a</b></i></sup></a> <a href="#cite_ref-:0_1-1"><sup><i><b>b</b></i></sup></a> <a href="#cite_ref-:0_1-2"><sup><i><b>c</b></i></sup></a></span> <span class="reference-text"><style data-mw-deduplicate="TemplateStyles:r1215172403">.mw-parser-output cite.citation{font-style:inherit;word-wrap:break-word}.mw-parser-output .citation q{quotes:"\"""\"""'""'"}.mw-parser-output .citation:target{background-color:rgba(0,127,255,0.133)}.mw-parser-output .id-lock-free.id-lock-free a{background:url("/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Lock-green.svg")right 0.1em center/9px no-repeat}body:not(.skin-timeless):not(.skin-minerva) .mw-parser-output .id-lock-free a{background-size:contain}.mw-parser-output .id-lock-limited.id-lock-limited a,.mw-parser-output .id-lock-registration.id-lock-registration a{background:url("/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Lock-gray-alt-2.svg")right 0.1em center/9px no-repeat}body:not(.skin-timeless):not(.skin-minerva) .mw-parser-output .id-lock-limited a,body:not(.skin-timeless):not(.skin-minerva) .mw-parser-output .id-lock-registration a{background-size:contain}.mw-parser-output .id-lock-subscription.id-lock-subscription a{background:url("/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Lock-red-alt-2.svg")right 0.1em center/9px no-repeat}body:not(.skin-timeless):not(.skin-minerva) .mw-parser-output .id-lock-subscription a{background-size:contain}.mw-parser-output .cs1-ws-icon a{background:url("/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Wikisource-logo.svg")right 0.1em center/12px no-repeat}body:not(.skin-timeless):not(.skin-minerva) .mw-parser-output .cs1-ws-icon a{background-size:contain}.mw-parser-output .cs1-code{color:inherit;background:inherit;border:none;padding:inherit}.mw-parser-output .cs1-hidden-error{display:none;color:#d33}.mw-parser-output .cs1-visible-error{color:#d33}.mw-parser-output .cs1-maint{display:none;color:#2C882D;margin-left:0.3em}.mw-parser-output .cs1-format{font-size:95%}.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-left{padding-left:0.2em}.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-right{padding-right:0.2em}.mw-parser-output .citation .mw-selflink{font-weight:inherit}html.skin-theme-clientpref-night .mw-parser-output .cs1-maint{color:#18911F}html.skin-theme-clientpref-night .mw-parser-output .cs1-visible-error,html.skin-theme-clientpref-night .mw-parser-output .cs1-hidden-error{color:#f8a397}@media(prefers-color-scheme:dark){html.skin-theme-clientpref-os .mw-parser-output .cs1-visible-error,html.skin-theme-clientpref-os .mw-parser-output .cs1-hidden-error{color:#f8a397}html.skin-theme-clientpref-os .mw-parser-output .cs1-maint{color:#18911F}}</style><cite id="CITEREFMcReynolds1928" class="citation web cs1">McReynolds, James Clark (9 April 1928). <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/276/463/">"Majority Opinion - United States v. Manzi, 276 U.S. 463 (1928)"</a>. <i>supreme.justia.com</i><span class="reference-accessdate">. Retrieved <span class="nowrap">1 May</span> 2024</span>.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=supreme.justia.com&rft.atitle=Majority+Opinion+-+United+States+v.+Manzi%2C+276+U.S.+463+%281928%29&rft.date=1928-04-09&rft.aulast=McReynolds&rft.aufirst=James+Clark&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fsupreme.justia.com%2Fcases%2Ffederal%2Fus%2F276%2F463%2F&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AUnited+States+v.+Manzi" class="Z3988"></span></span>
</li>
<li id="cite_note-:1-2"><span class="mw-cite-backlink">^ <a href="#cite_ref-:1_2-0"><sup><i><b>a</b></i></sup></a> <a href="#cite_ref-:1_2-1"><sup><i><b>b</b></i></sup></a></span> <span class="reference-text"><link rel="mw-deduplicated-inline-style" href="mw-data:TemplateStyles:r1215172403"><cite id="CITEREFAnderson1926" class="citation web cs1">Anderson, George Weston (31 December 1926). <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-manzi-2">"Majority Opinion - United States v. Manzi, 16 F.2d 884 (1st Cir. 1926)"</a>. <i>casetext.com</i><span class="reference-accessdate">. Retrieved <span class="nowrap">1 May</span> 2024</span>.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=casetext.com&rft.atitle=Majority+Opinion+-+United+States+v.+Manzi%2C+16+F.2d+884+%281st+Cir.+1926%29&rft.date=1926-12-31&rft.aulast=Anderson&rft.aufirst=George+Weston&rft_id=https%3A%2F%2Fcasetext.com%2Fcase%2Funited-states-v-manzi-2&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AUnited+States+v.+Manzi" class="Z3988"></span></span>
</li>
</ol></div></div>' |
Whether or not the change was made through a Tor exit node (tor_exit_node) | false |
Unix timestamp of change (timestamp) | '1714582141' |
