Lazo v. Gonzales’s Empirical Analysis
462 F.3d 53 · 2006
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Lolong v. Gonzales (2007), Yusupov v. Attorney General of the United States (2008)
12 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. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229B (§ 240a of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Evangelista v. Ashcroft · Molina-Camacho v. Ashcroft · Delgado-Reynua v. Gonzales · Del Pilar v. United States Attorney General · Solano-Chicas v. Gonzales
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The government’s alternative argument is that the BIA is empowered to issue orders of removal in the first instance, as an “administrative officer to whom the Attorney General has delegated the responsibility,” within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(47). Because we hold that an order of removal was issued by the IJ, we do not decide whether the Attorney General has in fact delegated to the BIA the authority to issue orders of removal.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Thus, it follows that where the BIA reverses the IJ's order granting cancellation of removal, the BIA, in essence, gives effect to the IJ's order of removability, for the BIA decision eliminates the impediments to removal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he BIA did not `order' Lazo's removal (as Lazo characterizes the order); the BIA has removed an impediment to the removal that was ordered by the IJ.”
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.