United States v. Schwimmer | |
---|---|
Argued April 12, 1929 Decided May 27, 1929 | |
Full case name | United States v. Rosika Schwimmer |
Citations | 279 U.S. 644 (more) 49 S. Ct. 448; 73 L. Ed. 889; 1929 U.S. LEXIS 64 |
Holding | |
Pacifists are liable to be incapable of the attachment for and devotion to the principles of the U.S. Constitution that is required of aliens seeking naturalization. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Butler, joined by Taft, Van Devanter, McReynolds, Sutherland, Stone |
Dissent | Holmes, joined by Brandeis |
Dissent | Sanford |
Laws applied | |
Naturalization Act of 1906 | |
Overruled by | |
Girouard v. United States (1946) |
United States v. Schwimmer, 279 U.S. 644 (1929), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. It concerned a pacifist applicant for naturalization who in the interview declared not to be willing to "take up arms personally" in defense of the United States. Originally found unable by the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois to take the prescribed oath of allegiance, a decision reversed in appeal, the case was argued before the Supreme Court, which ruled against the applicant, and thus denied her the possibility of becoming a United States citizen.