Liu v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
380 F.3d 307 · 2004
Citation profile
24 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably Li v. Gonzales (2005), Iao v. Gonzales (2005)
24 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. Elias-Zacarias · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Dandan v. Ashcroft · Niam v. Ashcroft · Mitev v. Immigration & 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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“punishment or the infliction of harm for political, religious, or other reasons that this country does not recognize as legitimate.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A]ge can be a critical factor in the adjudication of asylum claims and may bear heavily on the question of whether an applicant was persecuted or whether she holds a well-founded fear of future persecution. The Guidelines for Children’s Asylum Claims advises that “harm a child fears or has suffered ... may be relatively less than that of an adult and still qualify as persecution.” See Guidelines for Children’s Asylum Claims, INS Policy and Procedural Memorandum from Jack Weiss, Acting Director, Office of International Affairs to Asylum Officers, Immigration Officers, and Headquarters Coordinators (Asylum and Refugees) 14, (Dec. 10, 1998), available at 1998 WL 34032561 . Indeed, other courts have used age as a determinative factor in deciding whether an applicant is eligible for asylum. See, e.g., Abay v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 634 , 640 (6th Cir.2004) (overturning, on the basis of age, the immigration judge’s finding that a nine-year-old applicant had not adequately expressed a fear of future persecution).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“detention, arrest, interrogation, prosecution, imprisonment, illegal searches, confiscation of property, surveillance, beatings, or torture”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.