Sheku-Kamara v. Karn
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
581 F. Supp. 582 (1984)
Facts
Benedict Sheku-Kamara, a citizen of Sierra Leone, entered the United States in 1978 as an exchange visitor pursuant to § 101(a)(15)(J) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) to pursue graduate studies at the University of Pennsylvania. Exchange visitors who are admitted under Section 101(a)(15)(J), also known as J-1 status, are subject to a two-year foreign residence requirement mandated by Section 212(e) of the Act before they can apply for permanent residence. In 1979, Mr. Sheku-Kamara married Mrs. Sheku-Kamara (plaintiff), who gave birth to their son in 1980. Shortly thereafter, Mrs. Sheku-Kamara and the son were granted entry into the United States with J-2 status, as dependents of a foreign exchange student. In 1981, Mr. Sheku-Kamara transferred from a government-funded program to a privately funded program, which transfer was made retroactive to 1979. While living in the United States, Mrs. Sheku-Kamara applied to transfer her status from non-immigrant to immigrant. Her application was denied because she had not met the two-year foreign residence requirement. Mrs. Sheku-Kamara sought a declaratory judgment that she and her child were not subject to the two-year foreign residence requirement, because they had entered the country after Mr. Sheku-Kamara had stopped participating in the government funded exchange program.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bechtle, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 707,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 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.
