Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 134 FSUPP2D 1238 - In Re Soliman

In Re Soliman’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
July 2013
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1186A (§ 216 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229 (§ 239 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Roe v. Wade · Turner v. Safley · United States v. Salerno · Griswold v. State of Connecticut · Procunier v. Martinez

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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"West Virginia's interest in preserving life is superior to White's personal privacy (severely modified by his incarceration) and freedom of expression right. Our research indicates that although only one appellate court has dealt with death resulting from hunger strikes, they are common in prisons throughout the country. Their main aim is to gain attention from prison officials and occasionally from the public, to manipulate the system. We cannot condemn fasting—Ghandi [ sic ] taught us about its force—as a way to secure change. But prison officials must do their best to preserve White's life." White, 170 W.Va. at 199 , 292 S.E.2d at 58.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"`Although the United States Constitution does not specifically mention a right to privacy, the Supreme Court has recently recognized it as an independent constitutional right. The Court has grounded the right on at least three sources: common[-]law rights, emanations from specific constitutional provisions, and the general requirements of "liberty" underlying the Constitution.'" Soliman, 134 F.Supp.2d at 1254 , quoting S. Bennett, The Privacy & Procedural Due Process Rights of Hunger Striking Prisoners, 58 N.Y.U. L.Rev. 1157, 1165 (1983).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “An aben ordered removed who is inadmissible under section 1182 of this title, removable under section 1227(a)(1)(C), 1227(a)(2), or 1227(a)(4) of this title or who has been determined by the Attorney General to be a risk to the community or unlikely to comply with the order of removal may be detained beyond the removal period and, if released, shall be subject to the terms of supervision in paragraph (3).”
    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.