Sandoval v. Reno’s Empirical Analysis
166 F.3d 225 · 1999
Citation profile
59 federal appellate · 24 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 179 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr (2001), Daniel Magana-Pizano v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (1999)
59 federal appellate · 24 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Lindh v. Murphy · Cannon v. University of Chicago
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 179 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in IIRIRA are properly understood as relating to judicial review under the APA. Id. at 235. We continued,”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“there shall be no appeal permitted in the case of an alien who is inadmissible or deportable by reason of having committed a criminal offense covered in section 212(a)(2) or section 241(a)(2)(A)(iii), (B), (C), or (D) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (as in effect as of the date of the enactment of this Act), or any offense covered by section 241(a)(2)(A)(ii) of such Act (as in effect on such date) for which both predicate offenses are, without regard to their date of commission, otherwise covered by section 241(a)(2)(A)(I) of such Act (as so in effect).”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[e]xeept as provided in this section and notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this Act.”
4 later decisions 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.