Connection lost
Server error
In re Ah Yup 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 court denied Ah Yup’s naturalization petition, holding that a native of China of the Mongolian race was not a “white person” eligible for U.S. citizenship under existing federal statutes.
Legal Significance: This case established that individuals of Mongolian descent were ineligible for U.S. naturalization, interpreting “white persons” narrowly based on common understanding and legislative intent to exclude Chinese immigrants.
In re Ah Yup 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
Ah Yup, a native of China and of the Mongolian race, petitioned for U.S. citizenship, meeting all statutory qualifications except for the racial prerequisite. Prevailing naturalization laws, originating from the Act of 1802, limited eligibility to “any alien, being a free white person.” The Act of July 14, 1870, extended naturalization to “aliens of African nativity, and to persons of African descent.” The Revised Statutes initially omitted “white persons” from § 2165 but § 2169 included the provision for persons of African descent. An 1875 Act amended § 2169 to clarify that naturalization provisions applied to “aliens being free white persons, and to aliens of African nativity, and to persons of African descent.” The court considered whether a person of the Mongolian race qualified as a “white person” under this statutory framework, examining common parlance, contemporary scientific classifications of race, and legislative history.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Is a native of China, of the Mongolian race, considered a “white person” within the meaning of the U.S. naturalization statutes and therefore eligible for citizenship?
Petition denied. A native of China of the Mongolian race is not 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
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
Is a native of China, of the Mongolian race, considered a “white person” within the meaning of the U.S. naturalization statutes and therefore eligible for citizenship?
Conclusion
In re Ah Yup solidified a racially restrictive interpretation of U.S. naturalization 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 cil
Legal Rule
Under the amended Revised Statutes § 2169 (18 Stat. 318), eligibility for 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
Legal Analysis
The court, per Judge Sawyer, embarked on a two-pronged inquiry: the definition 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 e
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- In re Ah Yup denied naturalization to a Chinese petitioner. -
