Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez
372 U.S. 144 · Decided February 18, 1963 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez was decided on February 18, 1963 by a vote of 5–4. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Arthur J. Goldberg wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Immigration, loss of citizenship or denaturalization” in the Civil Rights area. SCDB records that the Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 372 U.S. 144 · 83 S. Ct. 554 · 9 L. Ed. 2d 644 · 1963 U.S. LEXIS 2095
- Docket number
- 2
- Decided
- February 18, 1963
- Argued
- October 10, 1961
- Reargued
- December 4, 1962
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority opinion
- Arthur J. Goldberg
- Opinion assigned by
- Earl Warren
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Legal provision
- Estoppel
- Type of law
- Other
- Held unconstitutional
- An act of Congress
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Concurrence | Co-authored an opinion |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Concurrence | Co-authored an opinion |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Majority | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Byron R. White | Dissent | |
| Justice Arthur J. Goldberg | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Kennedy, Attorney General, v. Mendoza-Martinez
SCDB identifiers: case 1962-049, docket 1962-049-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Immigration, loss of citizenship or denaturalization”
- Schneider v. Rusk
- Rusk v. Cort
- Schneider v. RuskAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Costello v. United States
- United States v. Lucchese
- Polites v. United States
Cases on the same legal provision: Estoppel
- Federal Power Commission v. Amerada Petroleum Corp.
- Lear, Inc. v. AdkinsAltered precedent
- Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois FoundationAltered precedent
- Partmar Corporation v. Paramount Pictures Theatres Corp.
- United States v. International Building Co.
- Callanan Road Improvement Co. v. United States
Same Term, same area (Civil Rights)
- Schneider v. Rusk
- Douglas v. California
- Gray v. SandersAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Lane v. BrownLaw held unconstitutional
- Draper v. Washington
- Luckman v. Dunbar
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error