Citation network
Ardestani Vs. Ins
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 10, 1991
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 129 (1991) October Term, 1991 Syllabus Ardestani V. ImmigrationSearch
-
b), they are not governed by the APA. Marcello v. BondsSearch
-
Syllabus The strong presumption that the statute's plain language expresses congressional intent, Rubin v. UnitedSearch
-
of sovereign immunity, which must be strictly construed in the United States' favor, see, e. g., Library of Congress v. ShawSearch
-
U. S. 310 , 318. United States v. KubrickSearch
-
Irwin v. DepartmentSearch
-
of Appeals agree with the court below that the EAJA does not apply to administrative deportation proceedings. Hashim v. INSSearch
-
Escobar v. INSSearch
-
Hodge v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Full Gospel Portland Church v. ThornburghSearch
-
Clarke v. INSSearch
-
accord, Owen v. BrockSearch
-
Circuit has determined that administrative deportation proceedings are within the scope of the EAJA. Escobar Ruiz v. INSSearch
-
b), we previously have decided that they are not governed by the APA. Marcello v. BondsSearch
-
the enactment of the IN A, we had concluded that immigration proceedings were subject to the APA. Wong Yang Sung v. McGrathSearch
-
United States v. JamesSearch
-
U. S. 597, 604 (1986) (quoting Blue Chip Stamps v. ManorSearch
-
St. Louis Fuel & Supply Co. v. FERCSearch
-
Rubin v. UnitedSearch
-
emphases added). 136 intent is clearly expressed. INS v. Cardoza-FonsecaSearch
-
Consumer Product Safety Comm'n v. GTESearch
-
that the legislative purpose is expressed by the ordinary meaning of the words used.''' American Tobacco Co. v. PattersonSearch
-
U. S. 63 , 68 (1982) (quoting Richards v. UnitedSearch
-
of sovereign immunity. Any such waiver must be strictly construed in favor of the United States. Li brary of Congress v. ShawSearch
-
Ruckelshaus v. SierraSearch
-
see, e. g., Irwin v. DepartmentSearch
-
considered to be outside the EAJA's coverage. In 1985, Congress legislatively overruled Fidelity Construction Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
The Service emphasizes this Court's holding in Marcello v. BondsSearch
-
See Richardson v. PeralesSearch
-
provision, technically governs the proceeding. III As noted above, this Court recently held in Sullivan v. HudsonSearch
-
Escobar Ruiz v. INSSearch
-
for the alien involved in deportation proceedings-particularly in asylum cases-are enormous. See, e. g., INS v. Cardoza-FonsecaSearch
-
s interpretation of statutes outside its particular expertise and special charge to administer. See Adams Fruit Co. v. BarrettSearch
-
see also Professional Reactor Operator Soc. v. NRCSearch
-
to relieve the Government of any general obligation to appoint and pay counsel for indigent aliens. See Escobar Ruiz v. INSSearch
-
Syllabus Ardestani V. ImmigrationSearch
-
the APA. Marcello v. BondsSearch
-
Hashim v. INSSearch
-
Owen v. BrockSearch
-
of the EAJA. Escobar Ruiz v. INSSearch
-
the APA. Wong Yang Sung v. McGrathSearch
-
Blue Chip Stamps v. ManorSearch
-
Richards v. UnitedSearch
-
of Congress v. ShawSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial