Beharry v. Ashcroft

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that merely 15 because an “argument would likely have failed is not tantamount to stating that it would have been futile to raise it”
• noting that the distinction between a statutorily or judicially imposed exhaustion requirement is “pivotal” because “statutory exhaustion requirements are mandatory, while the judicial (common- law) exhaustion doctrine is discretionary and includes a number of exceptions”
• discussing the benefits of limiting judicial interference in agency affairs in the immigration context
• discussing the benefits of limiting judicial interference in agency affairs in the immigration context
• discussing the benefits of limiting judicial interference in agency affairs in the immigration context
• discussing the benefits of limiting judicial interference in agency affairs in the immigration context

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).