Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 33 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Elzbieta Klawitter v. Immigration and Naturalization Service.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Elzbieta Klawitter v. Immigration and Naturalization Service Anchor | green | “not only supports a contrary conclusion, but indeed compels it.” | 19 |
| 2 | Svitlana Denko v. Immigration and Naturalization Service | green | “when the board adopts the decision of the ij in lieu of issuing its own opinion, we review the ij's decision as the final agency decision.” | 8 |
| 3 | Elzbieta Klawitter v. Immigration and Naturalization Service | green | “in order to reverse the bia's factual determinations, the reviewing court must find that the evidence not only supports a contrary conclusion, but indeed compels it.” | 6 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.