Kawashima v. Holder: Difference between revisions

Kawashima v. Holder
Kawashima v. Holder
	Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 7, 2011; Decided February 21, 2012
Full case name	Akio Kawashima, et ux., Petitioners v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General
Docket no.	10-577
Citations	565 U.S. 478 (more) 132 S. Ct. 1166; 182 L. Ed. 2d 1; 2012 U.S. LEXIS 1084; 80 U.S.L.W. 4147
Argument	Oral argument
Case history
Prior	Appeal of deportation order denied (Bd. Immigr. App., 200?); reversed in part sub nom. Kawashima v. Gonzales, 503 F.3d 997 (9th Cir. 2007, withdrawn); reconsidered and fully reversed sub nom. Kawashima v. Mukasey, 530 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 2008, withdrawn); reconsidered anew and affirmed 615 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2010); certiorari granted, 563 U.S. 1007 (2011).
Holding
	"Filing a false tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. Section 7206 qualifies as an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act when the Government's revenue loss exceeds $10,000." Ninth Circuit affirmed.
Court membership
	Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy; Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito; Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
Majority	Thomas, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Alito, Sotomayor
Dissent	Ginsburg, joined by Breyer, Kagan

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 13:16, 11 December 2020

Kawashima v. Holder, 565 U.S. 478 (2012), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "filing a false tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. Section 7206 qualifies as an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act when the Government's revenue loss exceeds $10,000."^[3]^[4]

Background

Akio and Fusako Kawashima, Japanese nationals who legally resided in the U.S., owned the successful Nihon Seibutsu Kagaku restaurant in Thousand Oaks, California which filed false tax returns.

Opinion of the Court

In a 6—3 opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Court held that "filing a false tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. Section 7206 qualifies as an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act when the Government's revenue loss exceeds $10,000."^[3]

References

^ In light of Navarro-Lopez v. Gonzales, 503 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2007), decided the day after the initial decision in Kawashima.
^ In light of Nijhawan v. Holder, 557 U.S. ___ 129 S.Ct. 2294 (2009), granted certiorari while en banc rehearing request was pending.
^ ^a ^b ^c https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2011/2011_10_577
^ Kawashima v. Holder, 565 U.S. 478 (2012).

External links

Text of Kawashima v. Holder, 565 U.S. 478 (2012) is available from: CourtListener Google Scholar Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion)
Coverage of the case on SCOTUSblog

[1] In light of Navarro-Lopez v. Gonzales, 503 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2007), decided the day after the initial decision in Kawashima.

[2] In light of Nijhawan v. Holder, 557 U.S. ___ 129 S.Ct. 2294 (2009), granted certiorari while en banc rehearing request was pending.

[oyez-3] ttps://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2011/2011_10_577

[4] Kawashima v. Holder, 565 U.S. 478 (2012).

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
   |Prior=Appeal of deportation order denied (Bd. Immigr. App., 200?); reversed in part sub nom. ''Kawashima v. Gonzales'', 503 [[F.3d]] [https://www.leagle.com/decision/20071500503f3d99711480 997] ([[9th Cir.]] 2007, ''withdrawn''); reconsidered<ref>In light of ''Navarro-Lopez v. Gonzales'', 503 [[F.3d]] [https://www.leagle.com/decision/20071566503f3d106311541 1063] (9th Cir. 2007), decided the day after the initial decision in ''Kawashima''.</ref> and fully reversed sub nom. ''Kawashima v. Mukasey'', 530 [[F.3d]] [https://www.leagle.com/decision/20081641530f3d111111532 1111] (9th Cir. 2008, ''withdrawn''); reconsidered<ref>In light of ''[[Nijhawan v. Holder]]'', 557 U.S. ___ 129 S.Ct. 2294 (2009), granted certiorari while ''en banc'' rehearing request was pending.</ref> anew and affirmed 615 [[F.3d]] [https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20100804139 1043] (9th Cir. 2010); certiorari granted, {{ussc|563|1007|2011|el=no}}.
   |Subsequent=
-  |Holding="Filing a false tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. Section 7206 qualifies as an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act when the Government's revenue loss exceeds $10,000."<ref name="oyez">https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2011/2011_10_577</ref> Ninth circuit affirmed.
+  |Holding="Filing a false tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. Section 7206 qualifies as an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act when the Government's revenue loss exceeds $10,000."<ref name="oyez">https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2011/2011_10_577</ref> Ninth Circuit affirmed.
   |Majority=Thomas
   |JoinMajority=Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Alito, Sotomayor
@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 == Opinion of the Court ==
-In a 6–3 opinion written by Justice [[Clarence Thomas]], the Court held that "filing a false tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. Section 7206 qualifies as an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act when the Government's revenue loss exceeds $10,000."<ref name="oyez" />
+In a 6—3 opinion written by Justice [[Clarence Thomas]], the Court held that "filing a false tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. Section 7206 qualifies as an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act when the Government's revenue loss exceeds $10,000."<ref name="oyez" />
 == See also ==