Connection lost
Server error
Flemming v. Nestor Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The Supreme Court upheld a law terminating Social Security benefits for an alien deported for past Communist Party membership, finding the benefits were not an accrued property right and the law was not an unconstitutional punishment (bill of attainder or ex post facto law).
Legal Significance: Established that Social Security benefits are not a constitutionally protected ‘accrued property right’ but a statutory entitlement subject to congressional modification, so long as changes are not patently arbitrary and do not constitute punishment under the Bill of Attainder or Ex Post Facto Clauses.
Flemming v. Nestor Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Ephram Nestor, an alien, immigrated to the United States in 1913. From 1936 to 1955, he and his employers made mandatory contributions to the Social Security system. In November 1955, he became eligible for and began receiving old-age benefits. In July 1956, Nestor was deported for having been a member of the Communist Party from 1933 to 1939. At the time of his membership, it was not a deportable offense. Pursuant to § 202(n) of the Social Security Act, enacted in 1954, the government terminated Nestor’s benefits because his deportation was based on one of the grounds specified in the statute. Nestor challenged the termination, arguing that it deprived him of an accrued property right in violation of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause and that the statute constituted an unconstitutional bill of attainder and ex post facto law. The District Court held § 202(n) unconstitutional, and the government appealed directly to the Supreme Court.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a federal statute that terminates noncontractual Social Security benefits for an alien deported on specific grounds, including past Communist Party membership, violate the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause or the constitutional prohibitions against bills of attainder and ex post facto laws?
No. The Court held that Social Security benefits are not accrued property Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does a federal statute that terminates noncontractual Social Security benefits for an alien deported on specific grounds, including past Communist Party membership, violate the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause or the constitutional prohibitions against bills of attainder and ex post facto laws?
Conclusion
This case establishes a highly deferential standard for the congressional regulation of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris ni
Legal Rule
An individual's interest in noncontractual government benefits, such as Social Security, is Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui of
Legal Analysis
The Court's analysis proceeded in three parts. First, it rejected the claim Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Social Security benefits are not an “accrued property right”; they are