Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Boutilier v. Immigration And Naturalization Service

• 1966 • 387 U.S. 118 • Warren Court
In Boutilier v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1966, the U.S Supreme Court upheld a decision to deport Clive Michael Boutilier, a Canadian citizen who had been living in the United States since 1955. The reason for his deportation was based on him being homosexual which at that time was considered as "psychopathic personality" under immigration law. This case is significant because it highlighted the discrimination faced by homosexuals during this period in American history. Despite...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Warren Court
Term: 1966
Docket: 440
387 U.S. 118
87 S. Ct. 1563
18 L. Ed. 2d 661
1967 U.S. LEXIS 1400
Argued: Mar 14, 1967

Boutilier v. Immigration And Naturalization Service

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Boutilier v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1966, the U.S Supreme Court upheld a decision to deport Clive Michael Boutilier, a Canadian citizen who had been living in the United States since 1955. The reason for his deportation was based on him being homosexual which at that time was considered as "psychopathic personality" under immigration law. This case is significant because it highlighted the discrimination faced by homosexuals during this period in American history. Despite having lived and worked in America for over ten years without any criminal record or issues of misconduct, Boutilier's sexual orientation alone was deemed sufficient grounds for deportation. In a split decision (5-4), the court ruled against Boutilier stating that Congress intended to include homosexuality within its definition of "psychopathic personality". This ruling remained until 1990 when Congress removed homosexuality from its list of excludable conditions.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

The dissenting opinion in Boutilier v. Immigration and Naturalization Service argued that the majority's interpretation of the law was incorrect, specifically their understanding of "psychopathic personality" as including homosexuality. The dissenters believed this interpretation to be a misreading of Congressional intent when they enacted the statute, which was originally intended to exclude individuals with severe mental disorders from immigration rather than targeting sexual orientation. They also pointed out that at the time Congress passed this legislation, homosexuality was not widely considered a psychopathic condition by medical professionals or psychiatrists. Furthermore, they criticized how Boutilier had been treated during his deportation proceedings; he wasn't given an opportunity for psychiatric examination nor allowed legal representation until late in his case process - both factors contributing to an unfair trial according to them.

Opinion written by Justice TCClark
Decided: May 22, 1967
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms