Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 20 I&NDEC 399 - CERNA

CERNA’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

105
cited by 105 later decisions
December 2020
most recently cited

18 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 105 later decisions — most recently December 2020 · most notably Iturribarria v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (2003), Ke Zhen Zhao v. United States Department of Justice (2001)

18 federal appellate ·

8601991200020102020decided

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

Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 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)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1251 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Udall v. Tallman · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Jong Ha Wang · White v. United States

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

  1. “A motion to reconsider asserts that at the time of the Board's previous decision an error was made.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “questions the Board's decision for alleged errors in appraising the facts and the law”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “not simply the specific aspect of the order that was challenged on appeal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.