Kovac v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
407 F.2d 102 (1969)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
In February 1967, Djordje Kovac (defendant) entered the United States as a nonimmigrant crewman on a Yugoslavian vessel. The Yugoslavian vessel departed the United States, but Kovac remained in the country, causing the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) (plaintiff) to begin deportation proceedings. Although he conceded he was deportable, Kovac stated he wished to apply for a temporary stay of deportation under Section 243(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The special-inquiry officer denied Kovac relief under Section 243(h) of the INA. Kovac appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), arguing that he was discriminated against in Yugoslavia because of his Hungarian ancestry by the Yugoslavian secret police. Kovac alleged he would face fiscal abuse and confinement because of his ancestry if he returned to Yugoslavia. The BIA affirmed the decision, finding that Kovac would face punishment for deserting his ship, not for his political opinions. The BIA also found Kovac would not face economic abuse but would merely be denied further employment on Yugoslavian ships, citing Matter of Banjeglav. The BIA also determined that fiscal abuse was unlikely given that some employment existed for Kovac in Yugoslavia. Kovac appealed to the Ninth Circuit, renewing the arguments made on his appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Browning, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.