S-P’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
25 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 117 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Fedaa al Najjar Mazen al Najjar v. John Ashcroft Attorney General US Department of Justice (2001), Sanchez Jimenez v. U.S. Attorney General (2007)
25 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. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1253 (§ 243 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Fedorenko v. United States · Singh v. Ilchert · Osorio v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
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 117 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[persecutors may have differing motives for engaging in acts of persecution, some tied to reasons protected under the Act and others not. Proving the actual, exact reason for persecution or feared persecution may be impossible in many cases. An asylum applicant is not obliged to show conclusively why persecution has occurred or may occur.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The record indicates that the applicant was arrested ... not only to obtain information from him about his brother, who was a mujahidin member, but also because the discovery of mujahidin fliers in his house led authorities to suspect that the applicant and his father were involved with the mujahidin too.... The applicant’s detention and imprisonment for his support of the mujahidin constituted persecution on account of political opinion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Vumi v. Gonzales“indications in the particular case that the abuse was directed toward modifying or punishing opinion rather than conduct ( e.g., statements or actions by the perpetrators or abuse out of proportion to nonpolitical ends)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Singh v. Gonzalez
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.