Damus v. Nielsen’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 5 U.S.C. § 702 · 5 U.S.C. § 706 · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1221 (§ 231 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1225 (§ 235 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1226 (§ 236 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))
Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor · General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon · Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that the requested relief is warranted. Hospitality Staffing Solutions, LLC v. Reyes , 736 F.Supp.2d 192 , 197 (D.D.C. 2010) (quoting Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches v. England , 454 F.3d 290 , 297 (D.C. Cir. 2006) ). Before the Supreme Court's decision in Winter v. NRDC , courts weighed these factors on a”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. M.G.U. v. Nielsen“is not intended to, shall not be construed to, may not be relied upon to, and does not create, any rights, privileges, or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any party against the United States.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Aracely v. Nielsen“[A]gencies cannot 'relax or modify' regulations that provide the only safeguard individuals have against unlimited agency discretion in hiring and termination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Aracely v. Nielsen
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.