L-O-G’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently August 2024
8 federal appellate ·
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. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1254 (§ 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Doherty · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Abudu · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Jong Ha Wang · Town of Hallie v. City of Eau Claire · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Rios-Pineda
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“had already had an opportunity to fully present and litigate his request for discretionary relief”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“acknowledge[d] [the Board's] prior decisions holding that the moving party generally bears a heavy burden in seeking reopening of proceedings,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“worthwhile to develop the extreme hardship issue further at a full evidentiary hearing.”
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.