Joseph v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
579 F.3d 827 · 2009
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably Miller v. Herman (2010), CE Design, Ltd. v. Prism Business Media, Inc. (2010)
17 federal appellate · 1 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Illinois Northern District Court)
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · United States v. Mead Corp. · Auer v. Robbins
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Just as varying degrees of deference are appropriate for regulations or other forms of guidance issued by agencies, so too are different levels of deference appropriate for interpretations of regulations offered by agencies. When the agency speaks formally, Auer holds that the agency’s interpretation is controlling unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation. An off-the-cuff response to an interpretive question from the first person who answers the telephone would be quite a different matter.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he only requirements are (1) that there be changed circumstances, (2) that the circumstances be material and (3) that the evidence showing changed circumstances 'was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the previous hearing.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Yahya v. Sessions“Chevron, however, deals only with the question whether an agency acts within its authority when it formulates a policy and issues a regulation.”); Sehie v. City of Aurora, 432 F.3d 749 , 753 (7th Cir.2005) (stating that”
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.