Rivera v. Lynch’s Empirical Analysis
816 F.3d 1064 · 2016
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1542 · 18 U.S.C. § 1621 · 8 U.S.C. § 1229B (§ 240a 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 Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Taylor v. United States · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · United States v. Dunnigan · Immigration and Naturalization Service, v. Juan Anibal Aguirre-Aguirre
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]e [have] rel[ied] on our own generalized definition of moral turpitude, which divides almost all CIMTs into two basic types: those involving fraud and those involving grave acts of baseness or depravity.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“These two categories, however, are not exhaustive.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Barbosa v. Barr · Barbosa v. Barr“does not fit neatly into the two-part framework”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Barbosa v. Barr · Barbosa v. Barr
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.