Statute treatment: 8 U.S.C. § 1427

Ranked leading cases interpreting this statute, drawn from 1,280 citation events across 639 distinct cases.

1,280citations total

639distinct interpreting cases

96distinct courts

220citations in last 5y

1955–2025year range

Top 20 leading cases

#1 Kungys v. United States (1988) scotus 781 own cites 8× in case

#2 Nyquist v. Mauclet (1977) scotus 245 own cites 8× in case

#3 Sugarman v. Dougall (1973) scotus 447 own cites 6× in case

#4 Fedorenko v. United States (1981) scotus 511 own cites 4× in case

#5 United States v. Jonas Stelmokas, A/K/A Jonas Stelmokevicius (1997) ca3 36 own cites 10× in case

#6 Foley v. Connelie (1978) scotus 247 own cites 4× in case

#7 Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Chadha (1983) scotus 1,805 own cites 2× in case

#8 United States v. Anton Tittjung (2000) ca7 83 own cites 5× in case

#9 Hernandez De Anderson v. Gonzales (2007) ca9 56 own cites 6× in case

#10 United States v. Osidach (1981) paed 44 own cites 6× in case

#11 United States v. Algimantas Dailide,defendant-Appellant (2000) ca6 21 own cites 8× in case

#12 United States v. John Demjanjuk (2004) ca6 72 own cites 4× in case

#13 Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co. (2011) cafc 413 own cites 2× in case

#14 Rosenberg v. Fleuti (1963) scotus 410 own cites 2× in case

#15 United States v. Divna Maslenjak (2016) ca6 7 own cites 15× in case

#16 United States v. Ciurinskas (1997) innd 8 own cites 13× in case

#17 Berenyi v. District Director, Immigration & Naturalization Service (1966) scotus 245 own cites 2× in case

#18 United States v. Antonio Medina Puerta (1992) ca9 78 own cites 3× in case

#19 United States v. Hovsepian (2004) ca9 171 own cites 6× in case

#20 Gonzalez v. Secretary of Department of HomeLand Security (2012) ca3 178 own cites 2× in case

Ranking method: leading_score = ln(1 + own_citation_count) × √(mentions_in_case) × flag_factor, where flag_factor = 1.0 green · 0.6 unknown · 0.5 neutral · 0.4 yellow · 0.3 procedural · 0 red. Red-flagged cases excluded — their interpretation has been undermined and shouldn't lead the list. Top 20 returned per statute. Open any case for full G Cite, trajectory, and per-circuit treatment.