Hernandez-Avalos v. Lynch’s Empirical Analysis
784 F.3d 944 · 2015
Citation profile
16 federal appellate ·
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. § 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 Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Ventura · Gonzales v. Thomas · Orellana-Monson v. Holder · 21 I. & N. Dec. 722 - S-M-J
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[petitioner's] relationship to her son is why she , and not another person, was threatened”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“was not threatened because of her relationship to her son (i.e. family), but rather because she would not consent to her son engaging in a criminal activity.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]e have expressly held that the threat of death qualifies as persecution.”
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.