BARTON v. SENTNER, 353 U.S. 963 (1957)
U.S. Supreme Court
BARTON v. SENTNER , 353 U.S. 963 (1957)353 U.S. 963
Lewis D. BARTON, District Director,
United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, District No.
11, appellant,
v.
Antonia SENTNER.
No. 728.
Antonia SENTNER, appellant,
v.
Lewis D. BARTON, District Director, United States Immigration and
Naturalization Service, District No. 11.
No. 784.
Supreme Court of the United States
May 20, 1957
Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Olney, and Beatrice Rosenberg, for Barton.
Mr. Sydney L. Berger, for Sentner.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed. See United States v. Witkovich,
353 U.S. 194.
They would note jurisdiction of this appeal and afford the Attorney
General an apportunity to present the Government's side of this
important internal security problem. United States v. Witkovich,
supra, in which they dissented, limited 242(d)(3) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, 66 Stat. 211, as amended,
8 U.S.C. (Supp. IV) 1252(d)(3), 8 U.S. C.A. 1252(d)(3), 'to
authorizing all questions reasonably calculated to keep the
Attorney General Advised regarding the continued availability for
departure of aliens ....' It passed on clause (3) and no other.
This appeal involves other clauses of 242(d), namely, clauses (1)
and (4), neither of which was passed on in Witkovich. The Court, by
summary affirmance of this appeal, without argument, enlarges its
holding in Witkovich and strikes down two more clauses of 242(d).
These two clauses are vital to the effectuation of the purpose of
the Congress in controlling subversives whose ordered deportation
has been forestalled by technical difficulties. For a more detailed
discussion see their dissent in Witkovich. Mr. Justice BURTON and
Mr. Justice CLARK dissent.[ Barton v. Sentner 353 U.S. 963 (1957) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
BARTON v. SENTNER , 353 U.S. 963 (1957) 353 U.S. 963 Lewis D. BARTON, District Director, United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, District No. 11, appellant,v.
Antonia SENTNER.
No. 728. Antonia SENTNER, appellant,
v.
Lewis D. BARTON, District Director, United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, District No. 11.
No. 784. Supreme Court of the United States May 20, 1957 Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Olney, and Beatrice Rosenberg, for Barton. Mr. Sydney L. Berger, for Sentner. PER CURIAM. The judgment is affirmed. See United States v. Witkovich, 353 U.S. 194. They would note jurisdiction of this appeal and afford the Attorney General an apportunity to present the Government's side of this important internal security problem. United States v. Witkovich, supra, in which they dissented, limited 242(d)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, 66 Stat. 211, as amended, 8 U.S.C. (Supp. IV) 1252(d)(3), 8 U.S. C.A. 1252(d)(3), 'to authorizing all questions reasonably calculated to keep the Attorney General Advised regarding the continued availability for departure of aliens ....' It passed on clause (3) and no other. This appeal involves other clauses of 242(d), namely, clauses (1) and (4), neither of which was passed on in Witkovich. The Court, by summary affirmance of this appeal, without argument, enlarges its holding in Witkovich and strikes down two more clauses of 242(d). These two clauses are vital to the effectuation of the purpose of the Congress in controlling subversives whose ordered deportation has been forestalled by technical difficulties. For a more detailed discussion see their dissent in Witkovich. Mr. Justice BURTON and Mr. Justice CLARK dissent.[ Barton v. Sentner 353 U.S. 963 (1957) ]
