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 3 cases, quoted by 20 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 Galina Ivanovna Smolniakova v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Galina Ivanovna Smolniakova v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General Anchor | green | “we review the ij's factual findings regarding changed country conditions for substantial evidence.” | 8 |
| 2 | Kavita Komal Pal Alveena Akashni Pal Davina Devika Pal Suruj Pal v. Immigration and Naturalization Service | green | “the evidence not only supports ... but compels” | 6 |
| 3 | Ranjeet Kaur v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General | green | “a denial must be upheld if supported by 'reasonable, substantial and probative evidence' in the record.” | 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.