Kaufman v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 5 U.S.C. § 702 · 5 U.S.C. § 706 · 8 U.S.C. § 1481 (§ 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Costle · Richards v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · 903 F. Supp. 96 - Fund for Animals v. Babbitt · 968 F. Supp. 2d 237 - Coe v. McHugh
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“clashed completely with his purported intent to sever all ties to the United States and to leave the country immediately.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kaufman v. Nielsen“arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kaufman v. Nielsen“speculative exit plan was neither plausible nor credible.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kaufman v. Nielsen
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.