Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 257 F.3d 1304 - Fernandez-Bernal v. Attorney General of the United States

Fernandez-Bernal v. Attorney General of the United States’s Empirical Analysis

257 F.3d 1304 · 2001

Citation profile

184
cited by 184 later decisions
March 2020
most recently cited

58 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 184 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably Barron v. Ashcroft (2004), Lin Zhong v. United States Department of Justice (2006)

58 federal appellate ·

1650200120102020decided

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

Relies on Plyler v. Doe · Reno v. Flores · Johnson v. Robison · Mathews v. Diaz · Heikkila v. Barber

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

  1. “[a] court may review a final order of removal only if... the alien has exhausted all administrative remedies available to the alien as of right.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), including section 2241 of Title 28, or any other habeas corpus provision, and sections 1361 and 1651 of such title, and except as provided in subparagraph (D), no court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed a criminal offense covered in section 1182(a)(2) or 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), (B), (C), or (D) of this title, or any offense covered by section 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii) of this title for which both predicate offenses are, without regard to their date of commission, otherwise covered by section 1227(a)(2)(A)(i) of this title.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “wholly negate[d] the effect on removal cases of all state rehabilitative measures that purport to expunge or otherwise remove a conviction or other record of guilt.”
    2 later decisions 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.