Dor v. Garland’s Empirical Analysis
2022
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (§ 241 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 Moncrieffe v. Holder · FRENTESCU · 23 I. & N. Dec. 270 - Y-L · Makhoul v. Ashcroft · N-A-M
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the adequacy of the Board's reasoning is a legal question that we may review”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dorce v. Garland
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.