Wanjiku v. Barr’s Empirical Analysis
918 F.3d 215 · 2019
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 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))
Relies on 24 I. & N. Dec. 247 - S-Y-G · Raza v. Gonzales · Fakhry v. Mukasey · Larngar v. Holder · Smith 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“show that the BIA committed an error of law or exercised its judgment in an arbitrary, capricious, or irrational way.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The BIA enjoys considerable latitude in deciding whether to grant or deny motions to reopen ... and we review the BIA's denial of a motion to reopen only for abuse of discretion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Twum v. Barr“When the BIA adopts the IJ's opinion and discusses some of the bases for the IJ's decision, we have authority to review both the IJ's and the BIA's opinions.”
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.