Flores-Villar v. United States

Docket No.	Op. Below	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
09-5801	9th Cir.	Nov 10, 2010 Tr.Aud.	Jun 13, 2011	4-4	Aff'd by a divided Court	OT 2010

Holding: An equally divided Court affirmed the decision of the Ninth Circuit upholding, against a constitutional challenge, a citizenship-transmission statute that imposes different standards for children born out of wedlock outside of the United States depending on whether the child's mother or father is a U.S. citizen. (Kagan, J., recused).

Plain English Holding: By a vote of four to four (because Justice Kagan was recused), the Court allowed the lower court's decision to stand; that decision rejected the argument that a federal law which establishes different standards for children born out of wedlock outside of the United States to obtain U.S. citizenship, depending on whether the child's mother or father was a U.S. citizen, is unconstitutional.

Judgment: Affirmed by an equally divided Court on June 13, 2011. (Kagan, J., recused).

SCOTUSblog Coverage

• This week at the Court: In Plain English (Lisa McElroy)
• Last week’s oral arguments: in Plain English (Lisa McElroy)
• Argument recap: possible remedies in citizenship-transmission case (Anna Christensen)
• Argument preview: Evaluating the INA’s citizenship-transmission requirement (Anna Christensen)

Briefs and Documents

Merits Briefs

• Brief for Petitioner Ruben Flores Villar
• Brief for Respondent United States of America
• Reply Brief for Petitioner Ruben Flores Villar

Amicus Briefs

• Brief for the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of San Diego and Imperial Counties in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for the National Womens Law Center et al., in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for Professors of History, Political Science, and Law in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for Scholars on Statelessness in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for Equality Now, Human Rights Watch, the Bahrain Women Association for Human Development, the Ethiopian Women Lawyers Association, Forum for Women, Law and Development, The International Human Rights Law Clinic at The University of Virginia School of Law, the International Women’s Rights Action Watch, the International Women’s Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific, Latin American and Caribbean Committee for the Defense of Women’s Rights, and Women In Law and Development in Africa in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for the National Immigrant Justice Center and American Immigration Lawyers Association in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for Immigration Reform Law Institute in Support of Respondent

Certiorari-Stage Documents

• Opinion below (9th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Petitioner’s reply