In 1996, the INS General Counsel withdrew a prior legal opinion and ruled that "simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana" includes all other cannabis products, including hashish, that fall within the broad federal definition of marijuana provided in 21 U.S.C. 802(16).  INS General Counsel Legal Opinion 96-3 (April 23, 1996), withdrawing INS General Counsel Legal Opinion 92-47 (Aug. 19, 1992) and reaffirming memoranda dated August 11, 1994, and February 17, 1994.

Convictions of minor offenses, or even of major offenses, which are punished in a perfunctory manner as "non-judicial punishment," do not constitute convictions of "crimes," and thus cannot trigger deportation under any of the deportation grounds requiring criminal convictions. This is true because no incarceration is possible as a result of this minor and informal procedure, and because the procedure cannot be called a criminal procedure so as to result in a criminal conviction of a crime. See Matter of Eslamizar, 23 I. & N. Dec. 684 (BIA Oct. 19, 2004) (en banc).

Kelava v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___ (9th Cir. Jan. 12, 2006) (repeal of 212(c) relief not retroactively applied to noncitizen deportable under INA 237(a)(4)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(4)(B) [terrorist activity], even though conviction pre-dated repeal, since the terrorist ground of deportation is conduct based and therefore there can be no settled expectations upset by entering a plea).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0373689oap.pdf

Reyes-Alcaraz v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 937, 938 (9th Cir.2004) ("service in the armed forces of the United States, along with the taking of the standard military oath, does not alter an alien's status to that of a 'national' within the meaning of the Immigration and Nationality Act").

Sebastian-Soler v. U.S. Attorney General, ___ F.3d ___, 2005 WL 1174069 (11th Cir. May 19, 2005) (taking of oath of allegiance before Immigration Officer does not satisfy exception under which oath can be taken before a judge in alternate location; asserted permanent allegiance to United States was insufficient to make him national of United States).

Costello v. INS, 376 U.S. 120 (1964) (person who was convicted of two crimes involving moral turpitude while he was a United States citizen cannot be deported on account of them after he lost his citizenship through denaturalization).

An applicant for admission to the United States as a citizen of the United States has the burden of proving citizenship. Matter of GR, 3 I. & N. Dec. 141 (BIA 1948). Once the applicant establishes that s/he was once a citizen and the government asserts that s/he lost that status, then the government bears the burden of proving expatriation. Ibid. The standard of proof to establish expatriation is less than the clear and convincing evidence test as applied in denaturalization cases, but more than a mere preponderance of evidence. The proof must be strict and exact. Ibid.

United States v. Hovsepian, 422 F.3d 883 (9th Cir. Sept. 6, 2005) (district court's decision to administer oath of citizenship affirmed where district courts finding that they were persons of good moral character was not clearly erroneous).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/9950041p.pdf

United States v. Karaouni, 379 F.3d 1139, 1143 (9th Cir. Aug. 24, 2004) ("All citizens of the United States are nationals, but some nationals, such as persons born in American Samoa and other U.S. territorial possessions, are not citizens. 8 U.S.C. 1408; Perdomo-Padilla v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 964, 967-69 (9th Cir.2003). Indeed, the term "national of the United States" is defined as including "a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States." 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22). Thus, a claim to be a U.S.

New form I-9 has a box for US Nationals, apart from box for US citizens.