7 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 42 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 Irineo Cuenca Brito v. Merrick B. Garland.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Irineo Cuenca Brito v. Merrick B. Garland Anchor | green | “merely parroting the proper standard of review does not im- munize the board's decision.” | 6 |
| 2 | Edwards v. Valteau | green | “final or- ders of removal encompass only the rulings made by the im- migration judge or board of immigration appeals that affect the validity of the final order of removal.” | 6 |
| 3 | Williams Rodriguez Salgado v. Merrick Garland | green | “mandatory and juris- dictional” | 6 |
| 4 | Jose Alonso-Juarez v. Merrick Garland | green | “the court reached this conclusion largely to avoid precluding judicial review where congress had not explicitly precluded such review.” | 6 |
| 5 | Jose Martinez v. Merrick Garland | green | “withholding and cat proceedings often take months or even years to conclude” | 6 |
| 6 | Argueta-Hernandez v. Garland | green | “have disastrous conse- quences on the immigration and judicial systems.” | 6 |
| 7 | Santos-Zacaria v. Garland | green | “ordered removed from the united states to el salvador.” | 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.