Ajaj v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Bell v. Wolfish · Sandin v. Conner · Williams v. Griffin
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Ajaj did not have a protected liberty interest in remaining at FCIEdgefield” and finding that this court was "without jurisdiction over anyone with responsibility for ... conditions” at FCI-Florence, in part because no one with responsibility over that facility was named in that action, but noting that the decision was "without prejudice to Ajaj’s right to challenge the conditions of his [FCI-Florence] confinement in the district court in Colorado”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Ajaj did not have a protected liberty interest in remaining at FCIEdgefield” and finding that this court was”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.