Burka v. Sessions’s Empirical Analysis
900 F.3d 575 · 2018
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Matul-Hernandez v. Holder · Munoz-Yepez v. Gonzales · Cambara-Cambara v. Lynch · Goromou v. Holder · Bin Jing Chen v. Holder
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“we may still review 'constitutional claims or questions of law raised upon a petition for review.' " Id. (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(D) ). Lesum argues the IJ committed legal error because it strictly enforced a six-month deadline to apply for asylum after the termination of his student status, without considering whether his longer delay in filing was reasonable under the circumstances. Pet'r's Br. 15. We disagree. An application for asylum must be "filed within 1 year after the date of the alien's arrival in the United States.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lesum v. Barr“[n]o court shall have jurisdiction to review any determination of the Attorney General”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lesum 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.