Jupiter v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
396 F.3d 487 · 2005
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently October 2022 · most notably Aguilar v. United States Immigration & Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security (2007), Palma-Mazariegos v. Gonzales (2005)
27 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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 6 U.S.C. § 291 · 8 U.S.C. § 1229C (§ 240b 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 Mathews v. Eldridge · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Doherty · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Abudu · LOZADA · Lozada 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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“review directly the IJ's decision as if it were the decision of the BIA.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“denial of due process may, in certain limited circumstances, be exempt from the ordinary exhaustion requirement,” Jupiter, 396 F.3d at 492 . Withal, we have underscored that”
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.