TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Tod v. Waldman

Tod, Commissioner of Immigration, v. Waldman Et Al.

Tod v. Waldman, 266 U.S. 547 (1925)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
January 12, 1925
Docket
No. 95
Judges
Taft
Citations
266 U.S. 54745 S. Ct. 1931925 U.S. LEXIS 311

Opinion — Taft

*548 Mr. Chief Justice Taft delivered the opinion of the Court.

By opinion handed down November 17, 1924, ante, 113, this Court sustained the contention of the Commissioner of Immigration that the respondents should not have been discharged under the writ of habeas corpus as directed by the Circuit Court of Appeals, but agreed with that court in its criticism of the action of the immigration authorities in dealing with the respondents here, and made modifications and additions to the order of that court. Counsel for the respondents in a petition for rehearing n'ow ask additional modifications. Of these, the Court deems it proper to grant two.

1st. Nothing in the order of this Court shall prejudice an application on behalf of Zenia Waldman to the discretion of the Secretary of Labor under § 21 of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, c. 29, 39 Stat. 874 , 891, to accept satisfactory security against her becoming a public charge and on its being furnished to admit her to this country.

2nd. Nothing in the order of this Court shall prejudice an application for release on bail of the respondents pending compliance with the mandate of this Court.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1925: 12018: 119252026peak 1925 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Jennings v. Rodriguez583 U.S. 281 (2018)
  2. Red Ball Transit Co. v. Marshall8 F.2d 635 (S.D. Ohio 1925)

Most recent

  1. Jennings v. Rodriguez583 U.S. 281 (2018)
  2. Red Ball Transit Co. v. Marshall8 F.2d 635 (S.D. Ohio 1925)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list