Lee v. Barr’s Empirical Analysis
2020
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1229C (§ 240b 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)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Arevalo v. Ashcroft · Lopez Perez v. Holder · Sicaju-Diaz v. Holder · Canaveral Toban v. Ashcroft · 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.
“when 'the petitioner can establish that the BIA made an error of law or acted in a manner that is fairly characterizable as arbitrary and capricious.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“that opportunity to rebut a report bearing . . . indicia of reliability allows us to say in this context that use of the report was not fundamentally unfair.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rosa v. Garland“evidence sought to be offered [on remand] is material and was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the former hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Moreno 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.