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 11 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 Garcia v. Gonzales.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Garcia v. Gonzales Anchor | green | “unable or unwilling to protect him against the private parties,” | 5 |
| 2 | Victor E. Sepulveda v. Alberto R. Gonzales | green | “the educated, landowning class of cattle farmers targeted by colombian rebels, christian women in iran who oppose the islamic dress code for women, parents of burmese student dissidents, and children who escaped after being enslaved from ugandan guerillas who had enslaved them.” | 3 |
| 3 | KASINGA | green | “as far as the female respondent's claim that she is afraid to return to kenya because of fear of female genital mutilation, while that contention may be sincerely subjectively expressed, i don't find that as toward country conditions; that is, it has an objective basis.” | 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.