Lopez v. Heinauer’s Empirical Analysis
332 F.3d 507 · 2003
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1631 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1251 (§ 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. § 1281 (§ 251 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Carafas v. J · McGee v. County of Orange · Japanese Immigrant Case · Carlos Castro-Cortez v. Immigration and Naturalization Service Jose Luis Araujo
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although habeas jurisdiction remains available to deportees who raise questions of law and who have no other available judicial forum [citing St. Cyr ], the statute here provides an adequate judicial forum, permitting the noncriminal deportee to file a petition for review in the appropriate court of appeals.... Lopez filed the wrong action in the wrong federal court.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[wjhenever a civil action is filed in a court as defined in section 610 of this title or an appeal, including a petition for review of administrative action, ... and that court finds that there is a want of jurisdiction, the court shall, if it is in the interest of justice, transfer such action or appeal to any other such court in which the action or appeal could have been brought at the time it was filed or noticed, and the action or appeal shall proceed as if it had been filed in or noticed for the court to which it is transferred on the date upon which it was actually filed in or noticed for the court from which it is transferred.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Because judicial review was available to [the noncriminal alien], the district court was not authorized to hear this § 2241 habeas petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ishak 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.