Mora-Meraz v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 2 district ·

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

1. “[a] reasonable basis exists where the agency considered the relevant factors and articulated a rational connection between the facts found and the choices made. Although we may uphold a decision of less than ideal clarity if the agency’s path may reasonably be discerned, we may not infer an agency’s reasoning from mere silence.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Peck v. Thomas · 787 F. Supp. 2d 1154 - Moon v. Thomas

2. ““Generally, agencies issue interpretive rules to clarify or explain existing law or regulations so as to advise the public of the agency’s construction of the rules it administers.” However, “[i]f a rule is inconsistent with or amends an existing legislative rule, then it cannot be interpretive.” This is because a rule that is inconsistent with a rule promulgated subject to notice and comment would impose new rights or obligations and would require compliance with the § 553 procedures.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sacora v. Thomas

3. “clarif[ies] or explain[s] existing law or regulations so as to advise the public of the agency's construction of the rules it administers.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lane v. Salazar