Gomes v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
311 F.3d 43 · 2002
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Goncalves v. Reno · De Osorio v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Buitrago-Cuesta v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Scheidemann v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Asencio v. Immigration & 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence who temporarily proceeded abroad voluntarily and not under an order of deportation, and who are returning to a lawful unrelinquished domicile of seven consecutive years, may be admitted in the discretion of the Attorney General .... 4”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Notice to Obligor to Deliver Alien” for execution of the final order of deportation, which was scheduled to take place just three days later, on March 1, 2004. (Pet.Hab.Corp^ 9.) Under these circumstances, Melo's detainment was sufficiently "imminent” to support his filing the Petition. 19 . In his Petition, Melo also alleged that IM-MACT's application to "admissions occurring after the date of the enactment of this Act,” IMMACT § 511(b), made the statute applicable only to aliens admitted into the country after IMMACT's enactment in 1990 (which does not include Melo). At oral argument on June 17, 2004, Melo conceded that the BIA’s interpretation of the term "admissions”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]hile Pereira had not served at least five years in prison for an aggravated felony offense at the time the BIA originally affirmed the IJ's order of deportation, he had served more than five years in prison by the time the BIA issued its final order of removal on May 30, 2002.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pereira v. Gonzales
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.