Matias v. Sessions’s Empirical Analysis
871 F.3d 65 · 2017
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Heckler v. Chaney · Kucana v. Holder · United States v. One Motor Yacht Named Mercury · Maria Dulce Pena Luis v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Tamenut v. Mukasey
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.
“does not create a cognizable liberty interest.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Nothing in subparagraph (B) or (C), or in any other provision of this chapter (other than this section) which limits or eliminates judicial review, shall be construed as precluding review of constitutional claims or questions of law raised upon a petition for review filed with an appropriate court of appeals in accordance with this section.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gyamfi v. Whitaker“we have repeatedly held that we do not have jurisdiction to review challenges to the BIA's failure to exercise its sua sponte authority because such decisions are 'committed to its unfettered discretion.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gyamfi v. Whitaker
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.