Johnson v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
286 F.3d 696 · 2002
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently October 2023 · most notably M-E-V-G (2014), Cruz v. Attorney General of the United States (2006)
23 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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. § 1105A (§ 106 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. § 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)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1253 (§ 243 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1254 (§ 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Abudu · Immigration and Naturalization Service, v. Juan Anibal Aguirre-Aguirre · Mohamed Abdille v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen the Board remands a case to an immigration judge for further proceedings, it divests itself of jurisdiction of that case unless jurisdiction is expressly retained. Further, when this is done, unless the Board qualifies or limits the remand for a specific purpose, the remand is effective for the stated purpose and for consideration of any and all matters which the Service officer deems appropriate in the exercise of his administrative discretion or which are brought to his attention in compliance with the appropriate regulations.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]hile the unpublished BIA decisions we have consulted are not necessarily in the category of "selected decisions ... designated to serve as precedents in all proceedings involving the same issue or issues,” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1 (g), agencies should not move away from their previous rulings without cogent explanation.... Where there is a consistent pattern of administrative decisions on a given issue, we would expect the BIA to conform to that pattern or explain its departure from it.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although an agency can change or adapt its policies, it acts arbitrarily if it departs from its established precedents without `announcing a principled reason' for the departure.”
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.