Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 693 F.3d 87 - Rebenko v. Holder

Rebenko v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

693 F.3d 87 · 2012

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 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. § 1227 (§ 237 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 Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias · Laeila Nelson Stephanie Nelson Phil Nelson v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Bocova v. Gonzales · Nikijuluw v. Gonzales · Laurent v. Ashcroft

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

  1. “[F]or purposes of establishing the right to asylum, the discriminatory experiences must have reached a fairly high threshold of seriousness, as well as some regularity and frequency.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “experience must rise above unpleasantness, harassment, and even basic suffering”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[P]ersecution 'always implies some connection to government action or inaction.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.