Thom v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
369 F.3d 158 · 2004
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (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)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Costello v. United States · Harisiades v. Shaughnessy · Janet Reno, Attorney General v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee et al.
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“it cannot reasonably be argued that aliens committed crimes in reliance on a hearing that might possibly waive their deportation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“it is the conviction, not the underlying criminal act, that triggers the disqualification from § 212(c) relief.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“would be considered ex post facto in the criminal context.”
1 later decision 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.