Angov v. Lynch’s Empirical Analysis
788 F.3d 893 · 2013
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229A (§ 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Meachum v. Fano · United States v. Armstrong · Shaughnessy v. United States Ex Rel. Mezei · Landon v. Plasencia
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[alliens ’who have once passed through our gates, even illegally,’ are afforded the full panoply of procedural-due process protections.” hi at 898 (quoting Meze i, 345 U.S. at 212 , 73 S.Ct. 625 ). The dissent in Angov observed that five other circuits have held that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[The alien] has no ... right [to procedural due process]. He presented himself at the San Ysidro port of entry without valid entry documents and sought asylum.... [T]hose, like [the alien], who have never technically 'entered' the United States have no such rights.”
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.