Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 608 F.3d 325 - Khan v. Holder

Khan v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

608 F.3d 325 · 2010

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
March 2019
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 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. § 1225 (§ 235 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 and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Woodby v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Gary Laguerre v. Janet Reno, Jose, Martin Avelar-Cruz v. Janet Reno · de Rincon v. Department of Homeland Security · Shamsher Singh v. Janet Reno, Attorney General of the United States, and Brian R. Perryman, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service

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

  1. “The troubling reality of the expedited removal procedure is that a CBP officer can create the § 1182(a)(7) charge by deciding to convert the person's status from a non-immigrant with valid papers to an intending immigrant without the proper papers, and then that same officer, free from the risk of judicial oversight, can confirm his or her suspicions of the person's intentions and find the person guilty of that charge.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “judicial correction of bizarre miscarriages of justice”
    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.