4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 12 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 Jonathan O. Madu v. U.S. Attorney General.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jonathan O. Madu v. U.S. Attorney General Anchor | green | “does not seek 'review of an order of removal' within the meaning of” | 3 |
| 2 | Estrada v. Holder | green | “a petition for review filed with an appropriate court of appeals ... shall be the sole and exclusive means for judicial review of an order of removal.” | 3 |
| 3 | Wroblewska v. Holder | green | “constitutional claims or questions of law,” | 3 |
| 4 | Pakovich v. Verizon LTD Plan | green | “an event occurs while a case is pending ... that makes it impossible for the court to grant any effectual relief,” | 3 |
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.