Hana v. Gonzales’s Empirical Analysis
503 F.3d 39 · 2007
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Maine District Court)
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 Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Stevic · Reno v. Flores · United States v. Zannino · Carlson v. Landon
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Nothing in subparagraph (B) or (C), or in any other provision of this chapter (other than this section) which limits or eliminates judicial review, shall be construed as pre-eluding review of constitutional claims or questions of law raised upon a petition for review filed with an appropriate court of appeals in accordance with this section.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. El-Labaki v. Mukasey“jurisdiction to review [an] agency's findings regarding timeliness or its application of the 'extraordinary circumstances' exception, 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3), unless an alien identifies a legal or constitutional defect in the 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.