In the case of Brownell, Attorney General v. Rubinstein (1953), the U.S Supreme Court dealt with issues related to immigration and naturalization laws. The respondent, Rubinstein, a Polish immigrant who had been living in the United States since 1921 was ordered deported due to his membership in an organization advocating for violent overthrow of government - a violation under Immigration Act's provisions. However, he claimed that he should not be deported because he had lost his Polish nationality by becoming stateless when Poland enacted legislation stripping emigrants like him of their citizenship. The court ruled against Rubinstein stating that loss of foreign nationality did not prevent deportation as per US law if an individual violated conditions set forth in Immigration Act; it further clarified that such individuals could be held indefinitely until they are accepted by another country or granted asylum within US.

In the dissenting opinion for Brownell, Attorney General v. Rubinstein, Justice William O. Douglas argued that the majority's decision to deport Rubinstein was a violation of his constitutional rights. He contended that even though Rubinstein had been convicted of a crime in 1940 and served time in prison, he should not be deported because he had already paid his debt to society by serving his sentence. Furthermore, Douglas pointed out that at the time of Rubinstein's conviction, deportation was not listed as a potential consequence for his crime; therefore it is unjust to retroactively apply this punishment now. The justice also emphasized how detrimental this ruling would be on Rubinsteins' family who are all American citizens and have established their lives here.