2 F. Supp. 3d 108 - Patel v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 14 U.S.C. § 1153 · 5 U.S.C. § 555 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946) · 5 U.S.C. § 704 · 5 U.S.C. § 706 · 8 U.S.C. § 1153 (§ 203 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1154 (§ 204 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1155 (§ 205 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Califano v. Sanders
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“conclude[d] that the arguments that section 1155 commits the revocation decision to the discretion of the agency are more persuasive[,]” he nonetheless proceeded to reach the merits based on”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.