Nadarajah v. Gonzales’s Empirical Analysis
443 F.3d 1069 · 2006
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Ren v. Holder (2011), Rodriguez v. Hayes (2009)
32 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
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 and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Mart Corporation v. Cartier Inc 47th Street Photo Inc · Kleindienst v. Mandel · Zadvydas v. Davis · Gulf Oil Co. v. Bernard
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“After this 6-month period, once the alien provides good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, the Government must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut that showing. And for detention to remain reasonable, as the period of prior postre-moval confinement grows, what counts as the “reasonably foreseeable future” conversely would have to shrink. This 6-month presumption, of course, does not mean that every alien not removed must be released after six months. To the contrary, an alien may be held in confinement until it has been determined that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If the [asylum] officer determines at the time of the interview [upon arrival in the United States] that an alien has a credible fear of persecution ..., the alien shall be detained for further consideration of the application for asylum.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Zadvydas , we conclude that the statutes at issue permit detention only while removal remains reasonably foreseeable. Further, consistent with Zadvydas , we conclude that after a presumptively reasonable six-month detention, “once the alien provides good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, the Government must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut that showing.””
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.