When was the Maslenjak case heard?
On April 26, 2017 , the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Maslenjak v. United States, No. 16-309 [ PDF version ]. The Supreme Court took the case on appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit decision in United States v. Malenjak, 821 F.3d 675 (6th Cir. 2016) [ PDF version ]. The question before the Supreme Court is whether the Sixth Circuit erred in holding that a naturalized citizen of the United States can be stripped of citizenship in a criminal proceeding based on the alien having made an immaterial false statement [ PDF version ].
What is the rebuttal of 18 U.S.C. 1425?
Landau began his rebuttal by noting, in response to Justice Gorsuch's final question to him, that 18 U.S.C. 1425 (a) and (b) are “largely overlapping,” and that it “doesn't in any way affect our central argument here…”
Introduction
- On April 26, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Maslenjak v. United States, No. 16-309 [PDF version]. The Supreme Court took the case on appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit decision in United States v. Malenjak, 821 F.3d 675 (6th Cir. 2016) [PDF version]. The question before the Supreme Court is whether the Sixth Ci…
Oral Argument on Behalf of The Petitioner
- The oral argument on behalf of Maslenjak was presented by Christopher Landau, Esq. Landau began by analyzing the plain text of 18 U.S.C. 1425(a). Both the government and the Sixth Circuit took the position that 18 U.S.C. 1425(a) does not require that an individual's false statement have been material in order to convict. However, Landau argued that the words “procured contrary to t…
Oral Argument on Behalf of Respondent
- Robert A. Parker, ESQ., represented the United States. Chief Justice John Roberts, who was silent during Maslenjak's arguments, immediately began questioning Parker. Chief Justice Roberts noted that one question on the Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, asks if an individual has ever “committed, assisted in committing, or attempted to commit a crime or offense for whi…
Rebuttal
- Landau began his rebuttal by noting, in response to Justice Gorsuch's final question to him, that 18 U.S.C. 1425(a) and (b) are “largely overlapping,” and that it “doesn't in any way affect our central argument here…” Landau also noted that Kungysonly stated that immaterial false statements could lead to denaturalization in the good moral character context.
Conclusion
- The Supreme Court decision in Maslenjak will be highly consequential in the denaturalization process. Although one can never be sure how the Supreme Court will rule from oral arguments alone, the general tenor of the proceedings appeared to be more unfavorable for the government than to Maslenjak. We will update the site with more information once the case is decided. Until …
Popular Posts:
- 1. who is rudy giuliani's attorney
- 2. what is the income for an attorney in new jersey
- 3. who played defense attorney in my cousin vinnie
- 4. what type of agency gives unlimited power of attorney
- 5. how to get power of attorney for someone with mental illness
- 6. how to become a government attorney
- 7. how can my attorney contact google
- 8. how many episodes switch phoenix wright ace attorney trilogy
- 9. how to change power of attorney in north carolina
- 10. catherine k new york attorney what not to wear