CaseTrail

Moser v. United States

341 U.S. 41 · Decided April 9, 1951 · Supreme Court of the United States

Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.

At a glance

Moser v. United States was decided on April 9, 1951 unanimously (9–0). The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice Sherman Minton wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Immigration, citizenship” in the Civil Rights area.

Read the opinion

Case details

Citations
341 U.S. 41 · 71 S. Ct. 553 · 95 L. Ed. 2d 729 · 1951 U.S. LEXIS 2018
Docket number
301
Decided
April 9, 1951
Argued
March 7, 1951
Court era
Vinson Court
Decision type
Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
Disposition
Reversed
Outcome for petitioner
The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
Vote
9–0 (unanimous)
Majority opinion
Sherman Minton
Opinion assigned by
Hugo L. Black
How the case arrived
Certiorari
Issue area
Civil Rights
Legal provision
Treaty
Type of law
Other
Decision direction (SCDB)
Liberal what this means

How the Justices voted

JusticeVoteSeparate writing
Justice Hugo L. BlackSpecial concurrenceCo-authored an opinion
Justice Stanley F. ReedMajority
Justice Felix FrankfurterSpecial concurrenceCo-authored an opinion
Justice William O. DouglasSpecial concurrence
Justice Robert H. JacksonMajority
Justice Harold H. BurtonMajority
Chief Justice Fred M. VinsonMajority
Justice Tom C. ClarkMajority
Justice Sherman MintonMajorityWrote an opinion

Full case caption

Moser v. United States

SCDB identifiers: case 1950-058, docket 1950-058-01.

Other cases on “Immigration, citizenship”

See all

Cases on the same legal provision: Treaty

Same Term, same area (Civil Rights)

See all

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