Holding: The Kansas statutes under which respondents, three unauthorized aliens, were convicted—for fraudulently using another person’s Social Security number on state and federal tax-withholding forms submitted to their employers—are not expressly preempted by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986; and respondent’s argument that those law are preempted by implication is rejected.
You May Also Like
New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira
legaladmin
Holding: A court should determine whether the Federal Arbitration Act’s Section 1 exclusion for disputes involving the “contracts of employment” of certain transportation workers applies before ordering arbitration; here, truck…
Hemphill v. New York
Holding: The trial court’s admission—over Hemphill’s objection—of the plea allocution transcript of an unavailable witness violated Hemphill’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him. Judgment: Reversed and Remanded, 8-1,…
Brown v. Davenport
Holding: When a state court has ruled on the merits of a state prisoner’s claim, a federal court cannot grant habeas relief without applying both the test the Supreme Court…
Wooden v. United States
Holding: William Dale Wooden’s ten burglary offenses arising from a single criminal episode did not occur on different “occasions” and thus count as only one prior conviction under the Armed…
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency
Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit set forth the proper test for determining whether wetlands are “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act,…
Delaware v. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin
Issues: (1) Whether MoneyGram Official Checks are “a money order, traveler’s check, or other similar written instrument (other than a third party bank check) on which a banking or financial…
