Pierre v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
588 F.3d 767 · 2009
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1344 · 18 U.S.C. § 513 · 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. § 1229A (§ 240 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 Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Reno v. Flores · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Lopez-Mendoza · Nijhawan v. Holder · Lin Zhong v. United States Department of Justice
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“constitutional claims or questions of law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to desist or refrain from granting, giving, or allowing”). Accordingly, we need not decide here whether a conviction for such conduct constitutes an aggravated felony under the INA. 2 . Moreover, in Pietre, the government “expressly disavowed any reliance on subsection U as a basis for finding [petitioner] removable,” and thus petitioner”
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.