Mohamed v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2331 (Material Support to Terrorism Prohibition Enhancement Act of 2004) · 49 U.S.C. § 114 · 49 U.S.C. § 44903 (Gerardo Hernandez Airport Security Act of 2015) · 49 U.S.C. § 44904
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Edelman v. Jordan
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“decision not to engage in international travel because of the difficulties [they] reasonably expect to encounter upon return to the United States is sufficient to demonstrate standing.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Wilwal v. Nielsen · Elhady v. Kable“in consultation with other appropriate Federal agencies and air carriers, establish policies and procedures requiring air carriers ... to identify individuals on passenger lists who may be a threat to civil aviation or national security,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Elhady v. Piehota“the Court concludes that Congress has provided 'intelligible principles' both as to the goals TSA should seek to achieve and also how it should go about achieving them, while leaving the day-to-day implementation of the scheme to TSA.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Elhady v. Piehota
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.