Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 593 F.3d 979 - Kawashima v. Holder

Kawashima v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

593 F.3d 979 · 2010

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
August 2010
most recently cited

3 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 7206 · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 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))

Relies on Taylor v. United States · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Shepard v. United States · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Ventura · United States v. Gonzales

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

  1. “constitutional claims or questions of law raised upon a petition for review.” As a threshold matter, the Kawashimas argue that the BIA applied the incorrect regulation when it determined that their motion was untimely. Whether the BIA applied the appropriate regulation is decidedly a”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “an offense that— (i) involves fraud or deceit in which the loss to the victim or victims exceeds $10,000; or (ii) is described in section 7201 of Title 26 (relating to tax evasion) in which the revenue loss to the Government exceeds $10,000[.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed” certain offenses, including an”
    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.