In re J----E

25 Cited authorities

Estelle v. Gamble
429 U.S. 97 (1976) Cited 57,038 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government has an obligation to provide medical care to incarcerated persons
Wilson v. Seiter
501 U.S. 294 (1991) Cited 15,402 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that conditions of confinement violate the Eighth Amendment when they combine to "have a mutually enforcing effect that produces the deprivation of a single, identifiable human need"
INS v. Elias-Zacarias
502 U.S. 478 (1992) Cited 5,181 times
Holding that central to the asylum statute is that persecution must be on account of a statutorily protected ground, making the assailant's "motive critical"
In re Winship
397 U.S. 358 (1970) Cited 11,813 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government must prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt
INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca
480 U.S. 421 (1987) Cited 2,412 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the phrase "well-founded fear," which is also found in 8 U.S.C. § 1101, is ambiguous
Addington v. Texas
441 U.S. 418 (1979) Cited 2,669 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the individual's interest in the outcome of a civil commitment proceeding is of such weight and gravity that due process requires the state to justify confinement by proof more substantial than a mere preponderance of the evidence"
Herman MacLean v. Huddleston
459 U.S. 375 (1983) Cited 1,328 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that an express remedy under § 11 of the 1933 Act for misleading registration statements did not preclude an overlapping implied private cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation under § 10(b) of the 1934 Act
INS v. Stevic
467 U.S. 407 (1984) Cited 924 times
Holding that to qualify for withholding of removal, an applicant must demonstrate a "clear probability" of persecution if removed
McElligott v. Foley
182 F.3d 1248 (11th Cir. 1999) Cited 1,228 times
Holding at summary judgment that there "was sufficient evidence to permit a jury to infer that the defendants in this case knew of a substantial risk of harm to [the prisoner]" and "to draw the conclusion that [the defendants] were not merely negligent" in providing subpar care
Najjar v. Ashcroft
257 F.3d 1262 (11th Cir. 2001) Cited 1,105 times
Holding that because the applicants failed to show a fear of persecution sufficient for an asylum claim, it followed that they could not make the higher showing necessary to support a claim under the Convention Against Torture
Section 1231 - Detention and removal of aliens ordered removed
8 U.S.C. § 1231 Cited 8,002 times 13 Legal Analyses
Concluding that once petitioner's removal order was reinstated, he was no longer eligible for "relief" in the form of adjustment of status-even if he could obtain a Form I-212 waiver
Section 1350 - Alien's action for tort
28 U.S.C. § 1350 Cited 1,193 times 64 Legal Analyses
Granting district courts jurisdiction over "any civil action . . . for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations"
Section 208.18 - Implementation of the Convention Against Torture
8 C.F.R. § 208.18 Cited 1,071 times
Defining torture
Section 208.17 - Deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture
8 C.F.R. § 208.17 Cited 127 times 1 Legal Analyses
Noting that deferral of removal is available for certain aliens ineligible for withholding of removal

In re J----E

25 Cited authorities

Holding that the government has an obligation to provide medical care to incarcerated persons

Holding that conditions of confinement violate the Eighth Amendment when they combine to "have a mutually enforcing effect that produces the deprivation of a single, identifiable human need"

Holding that central to the asylum statute is that persecution must be on account of a statutorily protected ground, making the assailant's "motive critical"

Holding that the government must prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Holding that the phrase "well-founded fear," which is also found in 8 U.S.C. § 1101, is ambiguous

Holding that "the individual's interest in the outcome of a civil commitment proceeding is of such weight and gravity that due process requires the state to justify confinement by proof more substantial than a mere preponderance of the evidence"

Holding that an express remedy under § 11 of the 1933 Act for misleading registration statements did not preclude an overlapping implied private cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation under § 10(b) of the 1934 Act

Holding that to qualify for withholding of removal, an applicant must demonstrate a "clear probability" of persecution if removed

Holding at summary judgment that there "was sufficient evidence to permit a jury to infer that the defendants in this case knew of a substantial risk of harm to [the prisoner]" and "to draw the conclusion that [the defendants] were not merely negligent" in providing subpar care

Holding that because the applicants failed to show a fear of persecution sufficient for an asylum claim, it followed that they could not make the higher showing necessary to support a claim under the Convention Against Torture

Concluding that once petitioner's removal order was reinstated, he was no longer eligible for "relief" in the form of adjustment of status-even if he could obtain a Form I-212 waiver

Granting district courts jurisdiction over "any civil action . . . for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations"

Defining torture

Noting that deferral of removal is available for certain aliens ineligible for withholding of removal