Saqr v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
580 F.3d 414 · 2009
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 16 · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229 (§ 239 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 Leocal v. Ashcroft · South Prairie Construction Co. v. Local No. 627, International Union of Operating Engineers · United States v. Campbell · Tasfa Wolde Wallace v. Janet Reno et al. · United States v. Moore
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[P]roceedings are 'initiat[ed]’ by providing written notice to the alien to appear before an immigration judge.”); Terezov v. Gonzales, 480 F.3d 558 , 563 (7th Cir.2007) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Toora 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.