LOCATION: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
DOCKET NO.: 09-5801
DECIDED BY: Roberts Court (2010-2016)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
CITATION: 564 US (2011)
GRANTED: Mar 22, 2010
ARGUED: Nov 10, 2010
DECIDED: Jun 13, 2011
Edwin S. Kneedler – Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, for the respondent
Steven F. Hubachek – for the petitioner (appointed by the Court)
Facts of the case
A California federal district court convicted Ruben Flores-Villar under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) of being a deported alien found in the United States. On appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Mr. Flores-Villar argued that the relevant provisions of the INA violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment on the basis of age and gender. The provisions impose a five-year residency requirement, after age fourteen, on United States citizen fathers but not mothers, whose residency requirement is merely one year. The Ninth Circuit applied the Supreme Court’s holding inNguyen v. INS which did not deal precisely with the provisions before the court, but held that other more onerous residency requirements for fathers but not mothers in the INA did not violate the Equal Protection Clause. The court concluded that the provisions challenged by Mr. Flores-Villar also did not violate the Equal Protection Clause and affirmed the judgment of the district court.
DoesNguyen v. INS permit gender discrimination that has no biological basis?
Media for Flores-Villar v. United States
Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement – June 13, 2011 in Flores-Villar v. United States
John G. Roberts, Jr.:
In case 09-5801, Flores-Villar versus United States, the judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.