Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 585 F.3d 980 - Al-Ghorbani v. Holder

Al-Ghorbani v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

585 F.3d 980 · 2009

Citation profile

81
cited by 81 later decisions
1
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Orellana-Monson v. Holder (2012), Crespin-Valladares v. Holder (2011)

20 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

710200920102020decided

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. § 1231 (§ 241 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 Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias · Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Stevic · Fatin v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · ACOSTA

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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “requires 'that the shared characteristic of the group should generally be recognizable by others in the community.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Questions of law are reviewed de novo, but substantial deference is given to the BIA's interpretation of the [Immigration and Nationality Act] and accompanying regulations. The BIA's interpretation of the statute and regulations will be upheld unless the interpretation is arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Where, as here, the BIA reviews the IJ's decision and issues a separate opinion, rather than summarily affirming the IJ's decision, we review the BIA's decision as the final agency determination.”
    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.