207 Ill. App. 3d 799 - Castillo v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently August 2025
9 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 3301 (Federal Unemployment Tax Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 3304 (Federal Unemployment Tax Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382C (§ 1614 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1160 (§ 210 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. § 1255A (§ 245a of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1324A (§ 274a of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on United States v. Cartwright · California v. Southland Royalty Co. · United States v. Vogel Fertilizer Co. · 116 Ill. 2d 528 - Airey v. Department of Revenue · Berger v. Heckler
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Congress’ commitment to aliens such as plaintiffs is demonstrated by the unique protections afforded them under IRCA. Legalization of a qualified alien under IRCA is mandatory. (8 U.S.C. §1255a(a) (1986).) Also, although the application period for filing for amnesty did not begin until some time after IRCA’s effective date, aliens apprehended before the application period commenced and aliens apprehended during the first 11 months of the application period could not be deported, were to be granted authorization to engage in employment and were to be granted an ‘employment authorized’ permit, provided they could establish a prima facie case of eligibility. (8 U.S.C. §1255a(e) (1986).) Moreover, IRCA provided that its amendment to the [Nationality Act] which made it unlawful to hire, recruit or refer unauthorized aliens does not apply to aliens, like plaintiffs, who were employed prior to IRCA’s effective date. It is apparent that Congress intended to and did provide special protections to aliens such as the plaintiffs in this case.” (Emphasis added.) 207 Ill. App. 8d at 809.”
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.