Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 385 F.3d 708 - Billeke-Tolosa v. Ashcroft

Billeke-Tolosa v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis

385 F.3d 708 · 2004

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
April 2025
most recently cited

12 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Marmolejo-Campos v. Holder (2009), Cisneros v. U.S. Attorney General (2008)

12 federal appellate ·

210200420102020decided

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 Fedaa al Najjar Mazen al Najjar v. John Ashcroft Attorney General US Department of Justice · Kalaw v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Denko v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Wilson v. Commissioner of Social Security · Javier Bernal-Vallejo 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “may review 'non-discretionary decisions that underlie determinations that are ultimately discretionary.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a conviction or corroborating evidence of the allegations contained”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “elemental principal of administrative law that agencies are bound to follow their own regulations”). 3 . Although the argument is undeveloped, to the extent Abu Foul charges the IJ with an abuse of discretion”
    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.