Jorge v. Gonzales’s Empirical Analysis
435 F.3d 146 · 2006
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably Shi Liang Lin v. United States Department of Justice (2007), Jiang v. Gonzales (2007)
10 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 Ramsameachire v. Ashcroft · Cao He Lin v. United States Department of Justice · Diallo v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Qiu v. Ashcroft · Marta Brigida Melgar De Torres Janet Reno and the 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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Sjtate forces and related paramilitary groups were responsible for 93% of the violations documented by the CEH, including 92% of the arbitrary executions and 91% of forced disappearances ... [Throughout the armed confrontation the Army designed and implemented a strategy to provoke terror in the population [which] became the core element of the Army’s operations, including those of a strictly military nature as well [as] those of psychological nature and those that were called “development” operations. ... Jorge-Tzoc was a child at the time of the massacres and thus necessarily dependent on both his family and his community ... Further, while the family remained in their village, Jorge-Tzoc’s mother was afraid to go out of their home to obtain needed groceries ... Jorge-Tzoc’s father lost his land and his animals as a result of [their eventual] move. This combination of circumstances could well constitute persecution to a small child totally dependent on his family and community.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“... 83% of the identified victims of the violence were Mayan ... [and] state forces and related paramilitary groups were responsible for 93% of [documented human rights] violations.... [Throughout the armed confrontation the [Guatemalan Government] designed and implemented a strategy to provoke terror in the population.... Mayans as a group ... were identified by the Army as guerrilla allies ... [leading to] ... massacres, scorched earth operations, forced disappearances and executions. ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]ecause the IJ failed to take into account significant evidence and to address the harms [the petitioner] and his family incurred cumulatively and from the perspective of a small child,”
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.