Matter of Armendarez-Mendez

39 Cited authorities

  1. Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Res. Def. Council

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,028 times   504 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"
  2. Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

    529 U.S. 120 (2000)   Cited 1,507 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress had not yet empowered the FDA to regulate tobacco products
  3. National Cable Telecom. Assn. v. Brand X Internet S

    545 U.S. 967 (2005)   Cited 1,176 times   41 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. INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca

    480 U.S. 421 (1987)   Cited 2,391 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the phrase "well-founded fear," which is also found in 8 U.S.C. § 1101, is ambiguous
  5. United States v. Santos

    553 U.S. 507 (2008)   Cited 951 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when the government alleges that the defendant laundered the "proceeds" of an illegal gambling business, the government must prove that the laundering transactions involved the profits of the business, rather than its gross receipts
  6. Nat'l Assoc. Home v. Defenders of Wildlife

    551 U.S. 644 (2007)   Cited 870 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a stray erroneous statement in the Federal Register "which could have had no effect on the underlying agency action being challenged" is not "the type of error that requires a remand"
  7. Ali v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons

    552 U.S. 214 (2008)   Cited 754 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding a Bureau of Prisons guard is a "law enforcement officer" under the Federal Tort Claims Act
  8. INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre

    526 U.S. 415 (1999)   Cited 809 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Board's construction of the statutes it administers warrants Chevron deference
  9. United States v. Fausto

    484 U.S. 439 (1988)   Cited 745 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the Claims Court (and any other court relying on Tucker Act jurisdiction) is not an ‘appropriate authority’ to review an agency's personnel determination" under the Back Pay Act
  10. Brown v. Gardner

    513 U.S. 115 (1994)   Cited 492 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the statute, as then in force, contained no requirement of fault
  11. Section 841 - Prohibited acts A

    21 U.S.C. § 841   Cited 91,072 times   147 Legal Analyses
    In § 841 prosecutions, then, it is the fact that the doctor issued an unauthorized prescription that renders his or her conduct wrongful, not the fact of the dispensation itself.
  12. Section 1101 - Definitions

    8 U.S.C. § 1101   Cited 16,365 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 9,718 times   66 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 7,891 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Granting this discretion to the Attorney General
  15. Section 1229a - Removal proceedings

    8 U.S.C. § 1229a   Cited 6,293 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Granting a noncitizen the right to file one motion to reopen and providing that “the motion to reopen shall be filed within 90 days of the date of entry of a final administrative order of removal”
  16. Section 1105a - Employment authorization for battered spouses of certain nonimmigrants

    8 U.S.C. § 1105a   Cited 2,573 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring appellate courts to uphold the Board's conclusions if "supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record as a whole"
  17. Section 1003.2 - Reopening or reconsideration before the Board of Immigration Appeals

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.2   Cited 7,771 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Granting power to Board
  18. Section 1003.39 - Finality of decision

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.39   Cited 77 times
    Stating that "[e]xcept when certified to the [BIA], the decision of the [IJ] becomes final . . . upon expiration of the time to appeal if no appeal is taken"
  19. Section 1003.4 - Withdrawal of appeal

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.4   Cited 32 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Beginning with how "[i]n any case in which an appeal has been taken, the party taking the appeal may file a written withdrawal thereof with the office at which the notice of appeal was filed"