Patel v. Jaddou’s Empirical Analysis
2024
Citation profile
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Massachusetts District Court)
Relationships
Applies 5 U.S.C. § 500 · 5 U.S.C. § 706 · 6 U.S.C. § 271 · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1151 (§ 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1153 (§ 203 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · City of Waukesha v. Environmental Protection Agency · Patel v. Garland · Antilles Cement Corp. v. Fortuño · Sparkle Hill, Inc. v. Interstate Mat Corp.
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.