Daneshvar v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
355 F.3d 615 · 2004
Citation profile
43 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 208 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2025 · most notably Pilica v. Ashcroft (2004), Sylla v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (2004)
43 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
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1189 (§ 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1253 (§ 243 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1255 (§ 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Doherty · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Abudu
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 208 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the basis articulated in the decision and [we] may not assume that the Board considered factors that it failed to mention in its opinion.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“this court must decide whether the [BIA']s decision was made without a rational explanation, inexplicably departed from established policies or rested on an impermissible basis, such as invidious discrimination[.]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Board's discretion is broad but it is not unlimited. It may not exercise its discretion in a way that is arbitrary, irrational or contrary to law. Cursory, summary, or conclusory statements are inadequate.”
2 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.