Rapheal v. Mukasey’s Empirical Analysis
533 F.3d 521 · 2008
Citation profile
26 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably Ren v. Holder (2011), Vilchez v. Holder (2012)
26 federal appellate ·
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. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229A (§ 240 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 Mathews v. Eldridge · Rusu v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Shabanali Ladha v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · 21 I. & N. Dec. 722 - S-M-J · Liu v. Ashcroft
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To hold that a petitioner must receive additional notice from the IJ and then an additional opportunity to provide corroborative evidence before an adverse ruling, would necessitate two hearings— the first to decide whether such corroborating evidence is required and then another hearing after a recess to allow the alien more time to collect such evidence.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Singh v. Holder · Abraham v. Holder“The testimony of the applicant, if credible, may be sufficient to sustain the burden of proof without corroboration.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“alien’s race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ayele 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.