Tay-Chan v. Barr’s Empirical Analysis
918 F.3d 209 · 2019
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229A (§ 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs · Pace v. Superintendent State Correctional Institution at Graterford · Wallace v. Kato · Wallace v. Kato · Gonzalez v. United States
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“under the 'highly deferential abuse-of- discretion standard.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“committed a material error of law or exercised its authority arbitrarily, capriciously, or irrationally.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“rests on a material error of law or a manifestly arbitrary exercise of judgment”
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.