Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 593 F.3d 785 - Hassan v. Chertoff

Hassan v. Chertoff’s Empirical Analysis

593 F.3d 785 · 2008

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
May 2021
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 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)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1255 (§ 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Raquel Sanchez-Cruz v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Ramirez-Perez v. Ashcroft · Samirah v. J O'Connell · Hosseini v. Gonzales · Hassan v. Chertoff

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

  1. “Inspection of evidence. An applicant or petitioner shall be permitted to inspect the record of proceeding which constitutes the basis for the decision, except as provided in the following paragraphs. (i) Derogatory information unknown to petitioner or applicant. If the decision will be adverse to the applicant or petitioner and is based on derogatory information considered by the Service and of which the applicant or petitioner is unaware, he/she shall be advised of this fact and offered an opportunity to rebut the information and present information in his/her own behalf before the decision is rendered, except as provided in paragraphs (b)(16)(ii), (iii), and (iv) of this section. Any explanation, rebuttal, or information presented by or in behalf of the applicant or petitioner shall be included in the record of proceeding. (ii) Determination of statutory eligibility. A determination of statutory eligibility shall be based only on information contained in the record of proceeding which is disclosed to the applicant or petitioner, except as provided in paragraph (b)(16)(iv) of this section.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The Attorney General may, ... in his discretion parole into the United States temporarily under such conditions as he may prescribe only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit any alien applying for admission to the United States----[Wjhen the purposes of such parole have been served the alien shall forthwith return or be returned to the custody from which he was paroled and thereafter his case shall continue to be dealt with in the same manner as that of any other applicant for admission to the United States.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), .... and regardless of whether the judgment, decision, or action is made in removal proceedings, no court shall have jurisdiction to review- — * * * (ii) any other decision or action of the Attorney General ... the authority for which is specified under this sub-chapter to be in the discretion of the Attorney General ... other than the granting of relief under section 1158(a) of this title.”
    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.