Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 487 F.3d 815 - Rivera v. U.S. Attorney General

Rivera v. U.S. Attorney General’s Empirical Analysis

487 F.3d 815 · 2007

Citation profile

74
cited by 74 later decisions
November 2021
most recently cited

8 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably Sanchez Jimenez v. U.S. Attorney General (2007), De Santamaria v. U.S. Attorney General (2008)

8 federal appellate ·

370200720102020decided

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 & Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias · Fedaa al Najjar Mazen al Najjar v. John Ashcroft Attorney General US Department of Justice · Adefemi v. Ashcroft · Borja v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Silva v. U.S. Attorney General

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.

  1. “any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality ... who is unable or unwilling to return to ... that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is quite plausible, indeed likely, that [persecution] would be engaged in by the guerrillas in order to augment their [income] rather than show their displeasure” with the petitioners’ political opinion. Although other inferences about the guerillas’ motives may be drawn, it is not our task to do so as long as substantial evidence supports the [Immigration Judge’s] conclusion. [E]ven if the evidence could support multiple conclusions, we must affirm the agency’s decision.”
    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.