Arar v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
585 F.3d 559 · 2009
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 16 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 117 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably In re Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation (2010), Anderson News, L.L.C. v. American Media, Inc. (2012)
37 federal appellate · 16 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.
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 938 · 18 U.S.C. § 2340A · 18 U.S.C. § 3181 (Extradition Treaties Interpretation Act of 1998) · 28 U.S.C. § 1350 (Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991) · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 46 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment
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 117 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“construe all reasonable 11 inferences that can be drawn from the complaint in the light most favorable to the 12 plaintiff,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Bivens is a relic of the heady days in which this Court assumed common-law powers to create causes of action-decreeing them to be "implied" by the mere existence of a statutory or constitutional prohibition.... [W]e have abandoned that power to invent "implications" in the statutory field. There is even greater reason to abandon it in the constitutional field, since an "implication" imagined in the Constitution can presumably not even be repudiated by Congress.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“(1) a 'nonfrivolous, arguable underlying claim' that has been frustrated by the defendants' actions, and (2) a continued inability to obtain the relief sought by the underlying claim.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.