In Rusk v. Cort, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1961 that a naturalized American citizen does not lose their citizenship by residing for three years in his native country unless it is proven that they intended to abandon their American citizenship. The case involved Beys Afroyim, born in Poland and later became an American citizen who moved back to Israel after World War II. He was denied a renewal of his US passport because he had voted in an Israeli election which according to then law resulted in loss of nationality as voting was considered evidence of intent to relinquish US nationality under Section 401(e) of the Nationality Act of 1940 amended by Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)of 1952 . However, the court held this provision unconstitutional arguing that Congress did not have power under Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment "to rob" citizens' rights without consent.

In the dissenting opinion for Rusk v. Cort, Justice Black argued that the majority's decision to allow a naturalized citizen to regain his U.S. citizenship after voluntarily renouncing it was inconsistent with both statutory law and precedent. He believed that Congress had clearly intended for individuals who voluntarily relinquished their American citizenship while abroad to lose it permanently, regardless of whether they later regretted their decision or claimed not to have understood its implications fully at the time. Furthermore, he pointed out that previous Supreme Court decisions had upheld this interpretation of the law and warned against judicial overreach in overriding legislative intent without clear constitutional justification.