Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 655 F.3d 363 - Khalid v. Holder

Khalid v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

655 F.3d 363 · 2011

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
August 2018
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1153 (§ 203 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. · Barnhart v. Sigmon Coal Co. · Brown v. Gardner · Dole v. United Steelworkers

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

  1. “[A] statutory provision cannot be read in isolation, but necessarily derives meaning from the context provided by the surrounding provisions, as well as the broader context of the statute as a whole.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “If the age of an alien is determined under paragraph (1) to be 21 years of age or older for the purposes of subsections (a)(2)(A) and (d) of this section, the alien's petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress.”
    2 later decisions 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.