Precetaj v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
649 F.3d 72 · 2011
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on McNary v. Haitian Refugee Center, Inc. · Laeila Nelson Stephanie Nelson Phil Nelson v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · CHEN · Lopez-Galarza v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Sowe v. Mukasey
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To qualify for humanitarian asylum based on the severity of past persecution, an applicant must prove that he experienced extraordinary suffering in the past. In other words, an [applicant] must show past persecution so severe that repatriation would be inhumane.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the government may rebut the presumption [of a well-founded fear of future persecution] with a showing of a fundamental change in circumstances in the country [to which petitioner will be removed] or the opportunity to relocate safely within [that country].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he paradigm case is one in which so much abuse has been directed against the victim that the suffering is projected into the future and that a return of the applicant to the place where the harm was inflicted would magnify the prior suffering.”
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.