Chlomos v. U. S. Department of Justice, Immigration & Naturalization Service’s Empirical Analysis
516 F.2d 310 · 1975
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably Xu Yong Lu v. Ashcroft (2001), Lee Moi Chong v. District Director, Immigration & Naturalization Service (2001)
24 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on Bridges v. Wixon · Relford v. Commandant, U. S. Disciplinary Barracks · Japanese Immigrant Case · United States of America Ex Rel. Harry E. Carey v. A. T. Rundle, Supt. · Garcia-Gonzales v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An alien subjected to deportation proceedings is entitled to due process of law.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Notice of the impending proceeding ... could and should have been given to [petitioner’s pre-existing attorney of record]. We disapprove of an administrative agency scheduling a hearing for a person who it knows is represented by counsel without giving reasonable notice to the lawyer. Such conduct is more than simply discourteous; it is unfair. It was particularly aggravating here, where petitioner was incarcerated and under a handicap in communicating with his lawyer.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We are dealing with procedural requirements prescribed for the protection of the alien. Though deportation is not technically a criminal proceedings, it visits a great hardship on the individual and deprives him of the right to stay and live and work in this land of freedom. That deportation is a penalty — at times a most serious one — cannot be doubted. Meticulous care must be exercised lest the procedure by which he is deprived of that liberty not meet essential standards of fairness.”
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.