§
In re Ortega-Lopez

50 Cited authorities

  1. Pereira v. Sessions

    138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018)   Cited 1,074 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an NTA that omitted the "time or place of the removal proceedings" failed to comply with the requirements of § 239 and was insufficient to trigger the so-called "stop-time rule" of INA § 240A(d)

  2. U.S. v. Stevens

    559 U.S. 460 (2010)   Cited 1,226 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding law unconstitutional under First Amendment where "impermissible applications ... far outnumber[ed] any permissible ones"

  3. National Cable Telecom. Assn. v. Brand X Internet S

    545 U.S. 967 (2005)   Cited 1,191 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an agency is free within "the limits of reasoned interpretation to change course" only if it "adequately justifies the change"

  4. Marx v. Gen. Revenue Corp.

    568 U.S. 371 (2013)   Cited 820 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding courts may award costs to prevailing defendants in FDCPA cases without finding the action was brought in bad faith and for the purpose of harassment under Rule 54(d)

  5. Clark v. Martinez

    543 U.S. 371 (2005)   Cited 939 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 1231 does not authorize indefinite detention

  6. Kucana v. Holder

    558 U.S. 233 (2010)   Cited 676 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 1252(B), which governs judicial review of discretionary decisions made by the Attorney General or the Secretary of Homeland Security, "does not proscribe judicial review of denials of motions to reopen"

  7. Jama v. Immigration & Customs Enforcement

    543 U.S. 335 (2005)   Cited 437 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress could not have ratified a “settled construction” of a statute, because there was no “judicial consensus so broad and unquestioned that we must presume Congress knew of and endorsed it”

  8. Shannon v. United States

    512 U.S. 573 (1994)   Cited 479 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court is not "required to instruct the jury regarding the consequences to the defendant of a verdict of 'not guilty by reason of insanity,' either under the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 or as a matter of general federal practice"

  9. Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton

    413 U.S. 49 (1973)   Cited 787 times
    Holding that "the interest of the public in the quality of life and the total community environment and . . . possibly, the public safety itself" is implicated in "stemming the tide of commercialized obscenity"

  10. Whitfield v. United States

    543 U.S. 209 (2005)   Cited 259 times
    Holding that a conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) does not require proof of an overt act

  11. Section 2 - Principals

    18 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 24,529 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Holding aiders and abettors punishable as principals under federal criminal law

  12. Section 1101 - Definitions

    8 U.S.C. § 1101   Cited 16,779 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding notice and comment rulemaking is required for the agency's interim rule recognizing fear of coercive family practices as basis for refugee status

  13. Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1182   Cited 9,951 times   71 Legal Analyses
    Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

  14. Section 1227 - Deportable aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1227   Cited 8,054 times   42 Legal Analyses
    Granting this discretion to the Attorney General

  15. Section 1229b - Cancellation of removal; adjustment of status

    8 U.S.C. § 1229b   Cited 5,213 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Granting the Attorney General discretion to cancel the removal of an alien who has “been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty by a ... parent who is ... a United States citizen”

  16. Section 2156 - Animal fighting venture prohibition

    7 U.S.C. § 2156   Cited 133 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Amending the term "animal fighting venture" to include fights "to be conducted"

  17. Section 49 - Enforcement of animal fighting prohibitions

    18 U.S.C. § 49   Cited 58 times

    (a) IN GENERAL.-Whoever violates subsection (a)(1), (b), (c), or (d) of section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, for each violation. (b) ATTENDING AN ANIMAL FIGHTING VENTURE.-Whoever violates subsection (a)(2)(A) of section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2156) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both, for each violation. (c) CAUSING AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS NOT ATTAINED THE AGE OF

  18. Section 1240.8 - Burdens of proof in removal proceedings

    8 C.F.R. § 1240.8   Cited 312 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Applying "clearly and beyond doubt" burden to "proceedings commenced upon a respondent's arrival" or "[a]liens present in the United States without being admitted"