Morales v. Chadbourne’s Empirical Analysis
793 F.3d 208 · 2015
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1226 (§ 236 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1357 (§ 287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Terry v. Ohio · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Monroe v. Pape
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Detaining individuals solely to verify their immigration status would raise constitutional concerns.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“she was subjected to a new seizure for Fourth Amendment purposes [when she was immediately rebooked on suspicion of being illegally in the United States]-one that must be supported by a new probable cause justification.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Alcocer v. Mills“Id. (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1226 (a) ) (emphasis added). Statutory authority for warrantless arrests, including the issuance of detainers, is provided in 8 U.S.C. § 1357 .”
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.