623 F. Supp. 545 - Singh v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1542 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 5 U.S.C. § 553 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946) · 8 U.S.C. § 1105A (§ 106 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1157 (§ 207 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 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))
Relies on Plyler v. Doe · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Stevic · Mathews v. Diaz · Houltin v. United States · Kleindienst v. Mandel
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The parole of aliens who have serious medical conditions in which continued detention would not be appropriate would generally be justified by “emergent reasons”; (2) The parole of aliens within the following groups would generally come within the category of aliens for whom the granting of the parole exception would be “strictly in the public interest”, provided that the aliens present neither a security risk nor a risk of absconding: (i) Women who have been medically certified as pregnant; (ii) Aliens who are defined as juveniles [under certain conditions] ... (iii) Aliens who have close family relatives in the United States (parent, spouse, children, or siblings who are United States citizens or lawful permanent resident aliens) who are eligible to file, and have filed, a visa petition on behalf of the detainee; (iv) Aliens who will be witnesses in proceedings being, or to be, conducted by judicial, administrative, or legislative bodies in the United States; (v) Aliens whose continued detention is not in the public interest as determined by the district director. (3) Aliens subject to prosecution in the United States who are needed for the purposes of such prosecution may be paroled to the custody of the appropriate responsible agency or prosecuting authority.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“does not mean that an excludable alien who is paroled has technically entered the United States.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“... Any alien who appears to the inspecting officer to be inadmissible, and who arrives without documents ... or who arrives with documentation which appears on its face to be false, altered, or to relate to another person ... shall be detained in accordance with section 235(b) of the Act [ 8 U.S.C. § 1225 (b)]. Parole of such aliens shall only be considered in accordance with § 212.5(a) of this chapter.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Amanullah v. Nelson
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.