Lanuza v. Love’s Empirical Analysis
899 F.3d 1019 · 2018
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 801 (Military Justice Act of 1968) · 10 U.S.C. § 803 · 18 U.S.C. § 1621 · 18 U.S.C. § 242 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229B (§ 240a 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 Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Pearson v. Callahan · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · Federal Deposit Insurance v. Meyer
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While the Supreme Court has not extended Bivens to a case involving the substantive and procedural clauses of the Fifth Amendment, Abbasi did not preclude the possibility of such an extension.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Doe v. United States“[t]he conclusion that [plaintiff's] case arises in a context meaningfully different [from those cases] is ineluctable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“necessarily intertwined with the execution of ... policy,”
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.