8 U.S.C. § 1161

Repealed. Pub. L. 103–416, title II, § 219(ee)(1), Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4319

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 8 CasesGoogle Scholar

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1989–2016 · leading case: Landin-Molina v. Holder, 580 F.3d 913 (9th Cir. 2009).
Landin-Molina v. Holder, 580 F.3d 913 (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “” 8 U.S.C. § 1161 (a)(1), repealed by Pub.L.”
Brinklys v. Johnson, 175 F. Supp. 3d 1338 (M.D. Fla. 2016). “See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1161 (b)(2)(A)®, 1154. To do so, the United States citizen (“the petitioner”) must file an 1-130 Petition on the alien relative’s behalf requesting that USCIS formally recognize the relationship and classify the alien (“the beneficiary”) as an “immediate relative.”
California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. v. Legal Servs. Corp., 917 F.2d 1171 (9th Cir. 1990). · cites it 3× “” The way in which Congress has distinguished among programs of “financial assistance,” “assistance,” and “medical assistance” in section 1255a(h) indicates that “financial assistance” means financial assistance and not just “assistance.”
AAI Servs., Inc. v. United States, 217 B.R. 281 (C.D. Cal. 1998). · cites it 2× “8 U.S.C. § 1161 (repealed 1994). The prior agricultural work requirement and the determination of need by Congress or the Secretaries provided adequate assurance that the workers would perform the needed agricultural work.”
California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. v. Legal Servs. Corp., 727 F. Supp. 553 (N.D. Cal. 1989). “Moreover, defendants cannot support their interpretation of IRCA by reference to Section 301(d)(6) of IRCA, 8 U.S.C. § 1161 (d)(6). That section provides that the five-year prohibition on certain programs of financial assistance does not preclude the provision of legal services…”
California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. v. Legal Servs. Corp., 937 F.2d 465 (9th Cir. 1991). “” Moreover, 8 U.S.C. § 1161 (d)(6) expressly provides “assistance furnished under the Legal Services Corporation Act .”
Garcia v. Yeutter, 756 F. Supp. 581 (D.D.C. 1990). · cites it 5× “” 8 U.S.C. § 1161 (a)(1). The RAW program also includes an emergency procedure for increasing the shortage number during a fiscal year to permit the admission of additional foreign workers.”
Landin-Molina v. Holder (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “” 8 U.S.C. § 1161 (a)(1), repealed by Pub. L.”
In Re Sun World Intern., Inc., 217 B.R. 281 (C.D. Cal. 1998). · cites it 2× “8 U.S.C. § 1161 (repealed 1994). The prior agricultural work requirement and the determination of need by Congress or the Secretaries provided adequate assurance that the workers would perform the needed agricultural work.”
Attul v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 42 F.3d 958 (5th Cir. 1995). “4978 , 5082 (1990), codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1161 note (Supp. III 1991). We determine that the amended version of § 1251 is irrelevant to the issue of Attul’s deportation.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.