§
In the Matter of S

3 Cited authorities

  1. Atlantic Cleaners Dyers v. U.S.

    286 U.S. 427 (1932)   Cited 480 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the presumption of uniformity gives way “[w]here the subject-matter to which the words refer is not the same in the several places where they are used”

  2. Ozawa v. United States

    260 U.S. 178 (1922)   Cited 181 times
    In Ozawa v. United States, 260 U.S. 178, 194, we said "It is the duty of this Court to give effect to the intent of Congress. Primarily this intent is ascertained by giving the words their natural significance, but if this leads to an unreasonable result plainly at variance with the policy of the legislation as a whole, we must examine the matter further.

  3. Lau Ow Bew v. United States

    144 U.S. 47 (1892)   Cited 133 times
    In Lau Ow Bew v. United States, 144 U.S. 47, this court held that the provision of the Chinese Restriction Act of May 6, 1882 (22 Stat. 58, c. 126, § 6) as amended by act of July 5, 1884 (23 Stat. 115, c. 220), requiring every Chinese merchant coming into this country to procure and produce a certificate from the Chinese Government, did not apply to Chinese merchants already domiciled in the United States, who, having left this country for some temporary purpose, sought to reenter it upon their return to their homes here.