Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 624 F.3d 1137 - Edu v. Holder

Edu v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

624 F.3d 1137 · 2010

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
June 2020
most recently cited

10 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (§ 241 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 Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · United States v. Mead Corp. · Immigration and Naturalization Service, v. Juan Anibal Aguirre-Aguirre

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

  1. “As the respondent did not appeal the denial of asylum and withholding of removal, the material support of terrorist bar only precludes his application for protection under the Convention Against Torture. Although such bar does not disqualify him from receiving a temporary deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture, for the reasons discussed above, the respondent failed to carry his burden of proof for such form of relief.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he weight accorded to an administrative judgment in a particular case will depend upon [among other factors] the thoroughness evident in its consideration”). That is, we need not defer because the BIA’s order has no”
    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.