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

Frad v. Kelly, U. S. Marshal

• 1937 • 302 U.S. 312 • Hughes Court
In the 1937 case Frad v. Kelly, U.S. Marshal, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning deportation and due process rights of immigrants under administrative law. The petitioner, Frad, was an immigrant who had been ordered to be deported by the Secretary of Labor for being a member of the Communist Party in violation of immigration laws at that time. He challenged this order arguing it violated his Fifth Amendment right to due process as he claimed not to have received fair...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 Hughes Court
Term: 1937
Docket: 87
302 U.S. 312
58 S. Ct. 188
82 L. Ed. 282
1937 U.S. LEXIS 548
Argued: Nov 09, 1937

Frad v. Kelly, U. S. Marshal

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1937 case Frad v. Kelly, U.S. Marshal, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning deportation and due process rights of immigrants under administrative law. The petitioner, Frad, was an immigrant who had been ordered to be deported by the Secretary of Labor for being a member of the Communist Party in violation of immigration laws at that time. He challenged this order arguing it violated his Fifth Amendment right to due process as he claimed not to have received fair notice or opportunity for hearing before his deportation was ordered. The court held that while aliens are entitled to procedural due process protections under the Constitution when facing removal proceedings, these procedures do not necessarily need to mirror those used in criminal trials. It further stated that since Congress has broad power over immigration matters and can delegate its authority within reasonable bounds; thus allowing executive officers like Secretary of Labor discretion in such cases. Therefore, even though Frad did not receive formal notice or hearing before his deportation order was issued - which would typically be required in criminal proceedings - it did not violate his constitutional rights because different standards apply for administrative actions like deportations.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for FRAD v. KELLY, U.S. MARSHAL, 1937, Justice Benjamin Cardozo argued that Frad should not be deported because his alleged perjury was not a crime involving moral turpitude as defined by immigration law at the time of his offense in 1926. He emphasized that changes to immigration laws after an offense cannot retroactively apply and affect one's deportation status. Furthermore, he contended that perjury does not inherently involve dishonesty or corruption; it depends on the circumstances surrounding each individual case. In this particular instance, Frad lied about being a member of the Communist Party out of fear rather than malicious intent - thus demonstrating no moral turpitude according to Cardozo’s interpretation.

Opinion written by Justice OJRoberts
Decided: Dec 06, 1937
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