Nolasco v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
637 F.3d 159 · 2011
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229 (§ 239 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · Reno v. Flores · Zhang v. Gonzales · Kaur v. Board of Immigration Appeals · Norton v. Sam's Club
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.
“meaningful opportunity to participate in her removal proceedings, that could implicate the minor alien's fundamental rights,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether service of the NTA violates a fundamental right when it is only effectuated upon a minor,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“defect in service, standing alone, does not”
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.