Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 236 FSUPP3D 820 - Bogle v. Dubois

Bogle v. Dubois’s Empirical Analysis

2017

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
February 2018
most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 8 U.S.C. § 1226 (§ 236 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Zadvydas v. Davis · Department of the Interior and Bureau of Indian Affairss v. Klamath Water Users Protective Association · Kennedy v. Empire Blue Cross & Blue Shield · Beharry v. Ashcroft · Lora v. Shanahan

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

  1. “If he were merely disputing the IJ's judgment, judicial review would be barred under 8 U.S.C. § 1226 (e), which provides that the Attorney General's detention decisions are not subject to judicial review and may not be set aside by a court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Abdi v. Nielsen
  2. “There is no statutory requirement of administrative exhaustion before immigration detention may be challenged in federal court by a writ of habeas corpus; however, such exhaustion is generally required as a prudential matter.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Abdi v. Nielsen
  3. “Although 8 U.S.C. § 1226 (e) bars judicial review of certain 'discretionary judgments],' that section does not deprive the Court of jurisdiction over [a detainee's] constitutional and statutory challenges to his detention.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Abdi v. Nielsen

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.