Majidi v. Gonzales’s Empirical Analysis
430 F.3d 77 · 2005
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,571 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably Paul v. Gonzales (2006), Siewe v. Gonzales (2007)
28 federal appellate · 1 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 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Zhang v. United States Immigration & Naturalization Service · Secaida-Rosales v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Wu Biao Chen v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
Cited together with Paul v. Gonzales · Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey · Xiao Ji Chen v. United States Department of Justice · Xue Hong Yang v. United States Department of Justice · Zhang v. United States 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 1,571 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] petitioner must do more than offer a plausible explanation for his inconsistent statements to secure relief; he must demonstrate that a reasonable fact-finder would be compelled to credit his testimony.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gao v. Sessions · Gurung v. Barr“an IJ may rely on an inconsistency in an asylum applicant's account to find that applicant not credible — provided the inconsistency affords `substantial evidence' in support of the adverse credibility finding — without soliciting from the applicant an explanation for the inconsistency.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[O]ur review is meant to ensure that credibility findings are based neither upon a misstatement of the facts in the record nor bald speculation or caprice.”
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.