§Why CasetextPricing

Mohammed et al v. Bush et al

Memorandum in opposition to re

43 Cited authorities

  1. Preiser v. Rodriguez

    411 U.S. 475 (1973)   Cited 18,069 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because the prisoners sought the restoration of good time credits—and consequently speedier release—their claims implicated the duration of their confinement such that their sole remedy was by writ of habeas corpus

  2. Mazurek v. Armstrong

    520 U.S. 968 (1997)   Cited 3,349 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "a plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief has a "requirement for substantial proof is much higher" than a defendant's summary judgment motion

  3. United States v. Salerno

    481 U.S. 739 (1987)   Cited 5,397 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "extensive safeguards" are necessary "to repel a facial challenge"

  4. Munaf v. Geren

    553 U.S. 674 (2008)   Cited 1,644 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that civilian U.S. citizens held in U.S. military custody in Iraq could petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court

  5. Whitmore v. Arkansas

    495 U.S. 149 (1990)   Cited 2,854 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a third party does not have "standing to challenge the validity of a death sentence imposed on a capital defendant who has elected to forgo his right of appeal"

  6. Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain

    542 U.S. 692 (2004)   Cited 1,167 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that no "private cause of action" had been Congressionally authorized, and thus, plaintiff was "not entitled to a remedy"

  7. Boumediene v. Bush

    553 U.S. 723 (2008)   Cited 967 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that enemy combatants are entitled to the privilege of habeas corpus

  8. Crosby v. Nat'l Foreign Trade Council

    530 U.S. 363 (2000)   Cited 983 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a state Burma sanctions bill conflicted with a federal Burma sanctions bill because it undermined Congress's delegation to the President of "flexible and effective authority" to adjust all sanctions in response to changing conditions

  9. Hamdi v. Rumsfeld

    542 U.S. 507 (2004)   Cited 613 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that exigencies of national security caution against full trial-type procedures to alleviate burden on Executive

  10. MedellÍn v. Texas

    552 U.S. 491 (2008)   Cited 488 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that President George W. Bush's memorandum in response to an international court's decision was "not a rule of domestic law binding in state and federal courts"

  11. Section 2241 - Power to grant writ

    28 U.S.C. § 2241   Cited 80,418 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to determine whether detention is "in violation of the . . . laws . . . of the United States"

  12. Section 1252 - Judicial review of orders of removal

    8 U.S.C. § 1252   Cited 42,537 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Holding court had no jurisdiction to review "any judgment regarding the granting of relief under section . . . 1229b"

  13. Section 1231 - Detention and removal of aliens ordered removed

    8 U.S.C. § 1231   Cited 7,799 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