Xuan Wang v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
341 F.3d 1015 · 2003
Citation profile
55 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 167 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably Chun He Li v. Ashcroft (2004), Singh v. Gonzales (2006)
55 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 Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Ventura · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Stevic · Sangha v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Mario Ernesto Navas 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 167 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] person who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or to undergo involuntary sterilization, or who has been persecuted for failure or refusal to undergo such a procedure or for other resistance to a coercive population control program, shall be deemed to have been persecuted on account of political opinion, and a person who has a well founded fear that he or she will be forced to undergo such a procedure or subject to persecution for such failure, refusal, or resistance shall be deemed to have a well founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is entitled to withholding of removal ... if it is more likely than not that he or she will be persecuted based on one of the protected grounds if returned to the country of removal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Thomas v. Gonzales“A reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude that the factual findings underlying the ... adverse credibility finding were not supported by substantial evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Singh 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.