Vitug v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
723 F.3d 1056 · 2013
Citation profile
11 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 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 Li Chen Zheng v. Ashcroft · Naseem Salman al-Harbi v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Leticia Cordon-Garcia v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Baballah v. Ashcroft · T-Z
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An applicant can make this showing, and be eligible for asylum, in two ways. First, the applicant can show past persecution on account of a protected ground. 8 C.F.R. § 208.13 (b)(1). Once past persecution is demonstrated, then fear of future persecution is presumed, and the burden shifts to the government to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that “there has been a fundamental change in circumstances such that the applicant no longer has a well-founded fear of persecution,” or “[t]he applicant could avoid future persecution by relocating to another part of the applicant’s country.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.13 (b)(1)© & (ii).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Doe v. Holder
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.