Ali v. Mukasey’s Empirical Analysis
525 F.3d 171 · 2008
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1229A (§ 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Xiao Ji Chen v. United States Department of Justice · United States v. Fares · United States v. El-Hage · Dallio v. Spitzer
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Asking the parties whether they accept a decision as “final” is a shorthand expression commonly used by Immigration Judges.... Those who understand the meaning of this shorthand expression, such as aliens represented by attorneys or accredited representatives, may effectively waive appeal in response to this simple question. However, the meaning and significance of this shorthand expression may not be apparent to the unrepresented alien. Asking an unrepresented alien whether he or she accepts a decision as “final” does not necessarily alert the alien to the fact that the question concerns the right of appeal or that an affirmative answer will be construed as an irrevocable waiver of that right.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Narine v. Holder
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.