Hsue Li Lee v. Reno

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the two habeas avenues “can, did, and were intended to peacefully coexist[ ]”
• finding that the government had waived “any objection to this Court exercising jurisdiction over [habeas petitioner’s custodian in Virginia]”
• finding that a retroactive application of § 440(d) would “disable” the petitioner by rendering him ineligible to apply for a waiver, imposing additional burdens on prior criminal conduct
• finding that in the absence of an express statement by Congress, a “textual argument” is persuasive and sup- ports the conclusion that “Congress did not intend for § 440(d
• \[P]recedent and reason fully persuade me that the Constitution contemplates that courts inquiring into the legitimacy of executive detention on habeas must be available to hear claims of statutory as well as constitutional wrong.\
• \[T]he `notwithstanding' provision [of the new S 242(g)] is simply insufficient in light of Felker for the Court to imply a repeal of S 2241.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).