Efe v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
293 F.3d 899 · 2002
Citation profile
42 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 439 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably Farah v. Ashcroft (2003), Wang v. Holder (2009)
42 federal appellate ·
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 Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Doherty · Immigration and Naturalization Service, v. Juan Anibal Aguirre-Aguirre · Navaratwam Kamalthas v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
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 439 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]ny act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or her or a third person information or a confession, punishing him or her for an act he or she or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or her or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[u]nlike the asylum and withholding of removal provisions, [Convention Against Torture] regulations do not require that the reason for the torture fall within one of the five categories of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Another difference is that CAT does not require persecution, but the higher bar of torture.” Id. at 907 . 4 . The Immigration Judge found in the alternative — even if it”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“because of the alien's race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.”
3 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.