§
In re Reyes

8 Cited authorities

  1. ISELIN v. LA COSTE

    147 F.2d 791 (5th Cir. 1945)   Cited 20 times
    In Iselin v. La Coste, 147 F.2d 791 (5th Cir. 1945), the court held that one who admitted the existence of Subject Matter Jurisdiction in a first litigation would not be heard to contend in a subsequent collateral litigation between the same parties that jurisdiction had been lacking.

  2. Section 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 98,133 times   136 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

  3. Section 1391 - Venue generally

    28 U.S.C. § 1391   Cited 28,103 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred

  4. Section 1226 - Apprehension and detention of aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1226   Cited 3,177 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Ruling that no court may set aside an immigration judge's "discretionary judgment any action or decision . . . regarding the detention or release of any alien or the grant, revocation, or denial of bond or parole"

  5. Section 1003.2 - [Effective 7/29/2024] Reopening or reconsideration before the Board of Immigration Appeals

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.2   Cited 7,785 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Granting power to Board

  6. Section 1003.14 - Jurisdiction and commencement of proceedings

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.14   Cited 483 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that removal proceedings commence "when a charging document is filed with the Immigration court"

  7. Section 1003.19 - Custody/bond

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.19   Cited 426 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Granting immigration judges jurisdiction to review custody and bond determinations

  8. Section 1236.1 - Apprehension, custody, and detention

    8 C.F.R. § 1236.1   Cited 178 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing parole where the alien has demonstrated that "such release would not pose a danger to property or persons" and he or she "is likely to appear for any future proceeding"