Opinion ID: 795993
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Count Four—Conduct Contrary to Human Decency

Text: 43 Finally, Firishchak contends that the government failed to prove that he advocated or acquiesced in activities or conduct contrary to civilization and human decency on behalf of the Axis countries during WWII. Such conduct would have rendered him ineligible for a visa under state department regulations at the time of his application. 22 C.F.R. § 53.33(j) (1949). Again, this argument is subject to the same waiver analysis, given that Firishchak stipulated that UAP service constituted conduct contrary to civilization and human decency. PIE Nationwide, 894 F.2d at 892. Further, given the facts established at trial, the district court properly concluded that Firishchak's UAP service constituted conduct contrary to human decency.