Kucana v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
316 federal appellate · 47 district · 2 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedKucana v. Mukasey (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 5 U.S.C. § 701 · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1103 (§ 103 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)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1324C (§ 274c of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Doherty · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Abudu · Stone v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Janet Reno, Attorney General v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee et al.
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 968 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“consistently applied [this presumption] to legislation regarding immigration, and particularly to questions concerning the preservation of federal-court jurisdiction.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[n]othing in subparagraphs (B) or (C) ... shall be construed as precluding review of constitutional claims or questions of law.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]e presume that Congress does not intend to limit jurisdiction if 'a finding of preclusion could foreclose all meaningful judicial review'; if the suit is 'wholly collateral to a statute's review provisions'; and if the claims are 'outside the agency's expertise.' " (citation omitted) ). 4 Finally, "[a]ny lingering doubt about the proper interpretation of 8 U.S.C. § 1252 [ ] would be dispelled by a familiar principle of statutory construction: the presumption favoring judicial review of administrative action.”
6 later decisions 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.