40 Cited authorities

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

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,041 times   505 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"
  2. Rumsfeld v. Padilla

    542 U.S. 426 (2004)   Cited 4,523 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that jurisdiction under § 2241(b) lies only in the district of confinement
  3. Zadvydas v. Davis

    533 U.S. 678 (2001)   Cited 4,273 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Government's detention authority under Section 1231 is authorized for "a period reasonably necessary to secure removal"
  4. Demore v. Kim

    538 U.S. 510 (2003)   Cited 1,684 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that mandatory detention of noncitizens convicted of a wide variety of offenses does not violate the Due Process Clause
  5. National Cable Telecom. Assn. v. Brand X Internet S

    545 U.S. 967 (2005)   Cited 1,179 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"
  6. Nat'l Assoc. Home v. Defenders of Wildlife

    551 U.S. 644 (2007)   Cited 874 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. Moskal v. United States

    498 U.S. 103 (1990)   Cited 562 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the rule of lenity is not triggered because it is "possible to articulate" a narrower construction of a statute
  8. Diop v. Ice/Homeland Sec.

    656 F.3d 221 (3d Cir. 2011)   Cited 630 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that noncitizen's release from pre-removal-order custody under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) did not moot his habeas petition where, unlike here, there was a non-speculative possibility that the petitioner could be subject to the complained-of detention again
  9. Burns v. Honigman, Miller, Schwartz Cohn

    451 Mich. 909 (Mich. 1996)   Cited 838 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Finding that child pornography "is a form of sexual abuse which can result in physical or psychological harm, or both, to the children involved."
  10. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Harris Trust

    510 U.S. 86 (1993)   Cited 214 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that variable annuities are not exempt from ERISA
  11. Rule 25 - Substitution of Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 25   Cited 10,799 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Providing for the automatic substitution at the district-court level of public officers sued in their official capacities
  12. Section 1227 - Deportable aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1227   Cited 7,921 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Granting this discretion to the Attorney General
  13. Section 1231 - Detention and removal of aliens ordered removed

    8 U.S.C. § 1231   Cited 7,828 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
  14. Section 1226 - Apprehension and detention of aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1226   Cited 3,173 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"
  15. Section 1228 - Expedited removal of aliens convicted of committing aggravated felonies

    8 U.S.C. § 1228   Cited 616 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Adopting conclusive presumption of deportability of convicted aliens and denying judicial review of removal orders
  16. 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
  17. 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"