Hugo Anderson v. Ralph H. Holton, as District Director’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate ·

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

1. ““Jay v. Boyd, 1956, 351 U.S. 345 , 76 S.Ct. 919 [ 100 L.Ed. 1242 ], impressively attests to the unfettered discretion granted the Attorney General by § 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, 66 Stat. 215 , 8 U.S.C.A. § 1254 . Because Congress went on to confide such discretion in the Attorney General we think an instance of judicially non-reviewable administrative discretion arises under § 10 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 60 Stat. 243 , 5 U.S.C.A. § 1009 providing: “ ‘Except so far as * * * (2) agency action is by law committed to agency discretion * * * “‘(e) Scope of Review. — So far as necessary to decision and where presented the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of law, interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, and determine the meaning or applicability of the terms of any agency action. It shall (A) ■compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed; ■and (B) hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity; (3) in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right; (4) without observance of procedure required by law; (5) unsupported by substantial evidence in any case subject to the requirements of sections 7 and 8 or otherwise reviewed on the record of an agency hearing provided by”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Batistic v. Pilliod · Cakmar v. Hoy