Miranda-Bojorquez v. Barr’s Empirical Analysis
2019
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on United States v. Armstrong · Yongo v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Ordonez-Quino v. Holder · Tota v. Gonzáles · Arias-Minaya 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“not only did the IJ find the reports reliable and that their use would not be fundamentally unfair, but he also gave [the petitioner] an opportunity to rebut their reliability. This is exactly what our precedents required the IJ to do.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[n]othing in the record compels us to find that the police and other government reports were so obviously unreliable as to render the agency's reliance on them an abuse of the agency's wide discretion.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“upholding [the] admissibility of [a] police report after the agency determined its reliability and fairness and offered [the] - 20 - petitioner 'an opportunity to challenge its veracity and refute its contents.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rosa v. Garland
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.