Find Court Cases > Flores-Villar v. United States

Flores-Villar v. United States

Case Date: 11/10/2010
Docket No: none

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 in Nguyen 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.

Read the Briefs for this Case
  • Brief for Petitioner
  • Brief Amici Curiae of the American Civil Liberties Union And the Aclu of San Diego And Imperial Counties In Support of Petitioner
  • Brief of the National Women’s Law Center Et Al. as Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioner
  • Brief of Amici Curiae Scholars On Statelessness In Support of Petitioner
  • Brief for Amicus Curiae Immigration Reform Law Institute In Support of Respondent
    • Question 

    Does Nguyen v. INS permit gender discrimination that has no biological basis?

    Argument Flores-Villar v. United States - Oral ArgumentFull Transcript Text  Download MP3Flores-Villar v. United States - Opinion AnnouncementFull Transcript Text  Download MP3 Conclusion  Decision: 4 votes for United States, 4 vote(s) against Legal provision: None

    Without answering the question, the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court order in an unsigned per curiam opinion. Justice Elena Kagan took no part in consideration of the case.