Shah v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
736 F.3d 1125 · 2013
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 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 and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Ackermann v. United States · Gonzalez v. Crosby · Calderon v. Thompson · Whorton v. Bockting
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t is difficult to understand how action in response to a litigant's motion could occur sua sponte . That phrase means action on a tribunal's own initiative. If the tribunal acts in response to a litigant's request, the step is not on its own initiative.”
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.