United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez
GPTKB entity
Statements (97)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:caseOutcome |
Judicial outcome favored the government.
Mixed reactions from civil rights groups. Affirmed lower court's decision. Affected law enforcement practices. Affected public policy on immigration. Analyzed for its impact on judicial decisions. Analyzed for its judicial outcome. Analyzed for its public policy implications. Analyzed for its role as a judicial precedent. Analyzed implications for future cases. Impacted judicial interpretations of rights. Impactful as a judicial precedent. Impactful in judicial outcome analysis. Impactful in judicial outcomes. Impactful in legal context analysis. Impactful in legal context. Impactful in legal debate analysis. Impactful in legal debates. Impactful in legal framework analysis. Impactful in legal implications analysis. Impactful in legal implications. Impactful in the legal framework. Influenced legislative discussions on immigration. June 25, 1990. Significant in judicial impact analysis. Significant in judicial impact. Significant in judicial outcome impact analysis. Significant in judicial outcomes. Significant in legal context impact analysis. Significant in legal debate impact analysis. Significant in legal framework impact analysis. Significant in legal implications impact analysis. Significant in public policy impact. The_ruling_limited_Fourth_Amendment_protections_for_non-citizens. Significant_in_the_context_of_U.S._law. |
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
Criminal law
89-202 Discussed in law journals. Constitutional review. Analyzed for its legal implications. Analyzed for its role in legal debates. Analyzed for its significance in law. Analyzed for public policy impact. Impactful as a judicial precedent analysis. Significant as a judicial precedent. Significant in judicial impact analysis. Significant in judicial precedent impact analysis. Significant in legal context analysis. Significant in legal debate analysis. Significant in legal debates. Significant in legal framework analysis. Significant in public policy impact analysis. Analyzed_within_the_context_of_U.S._law. Significant_in_the_legal_framework_of_the_U.S. |
| gptkbp:citedBy |
494 U.S. 259
|
| gptkbp:controversy |
Search and seizure laws.
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:Washington,_D.C.
5-4 ruling. Set_a_precedent_for_future_Fourth_Amendment_cases. |
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
June 25, 1990 |
| gptkbp:filedIn |
April 17, 1990
|
| gptkbp:firstClaim |
Influenced discussions on privacy rights.
|
| gptkbp:hasLegalEvent |
Significant in legal implications.
|
| gptkbp:historicalEvent |
Originated from a drug trafficking investigation.
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez
|
| gptkbp:impact |
Influenced future cases regarding extraterritorial application of constitutional rights.
|
| gptkbp:involved |
United_States_and_Miguel_Verdugo-Urquidez
|
| gptkbp:judges |
gptkb:Justice_John_Paul_Stevens
Supreme_Court_review. Stevens,_Blackmun,_O'Connor,_and_Souter. |
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
Extraterritoriality of constitutional protections.
Fourth_Amendment_rights Clarified_the_scope_of_the_Fourth_Amendment. International_law_and_U.S._constitutional_law. Represented_by_the_U.S._government. |
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
Available in legal databases.
Relevant to discussions on civil liberties. Analyzed Fourth Amendment applicability. Important for immigration law. Involved arguments about constitutional rights. Outcome influenced future judicial reviews. Judgment_delivered_by_Chief_Justice_Rehnquist. |
| gptkbp:outcome |
The_Court_held_that_the_Fourth_Amendment_does_not_apply_to_non-U.S._citizens_outside_the_United_States.
|
| gptkbp:politicalParty |
gptkb:Justice_Anthony_Kennedy
Rehnquist,_White,_Kennedy,_Thomas,_and_Scalia. |
| gptkbp:precedent |
Limits_on_the_application_of_the_Fourth_Amendment.
|
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:United_States_v._Reyes
gptkb:United_States_v._Mathews |
| gptkbp:team |
Set a legal precedent for future cases.
Debated in legal circles. Discussed for its legal implications. Established limits on constitutional protections. Examined under constitutional law principles. Examined_under_U.S._constitutional_law. Significant_impact_on_Fourth_Amendment_interpretation. |