Ixcot v. Holder

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that court is precluded from reviewing agency’s factual determina- tion that alien is ineligible for special rule cancellation of removal under NACARA
• holding that IIRIRA’s “reinstatement provision is impermissibly retroactive . . . when applied to an immigrant . . . who applied for immigration relief prior to IIRIRA’s effective date”
• holding the court had “jurisdiction to review final agency orders of removal, including reinstatement orders” under § 1252
• holding the court had “jurisdiction to review final agency orders of removal, including reinstatement orders” under § 1252
• holding the court had “jurisdiction to review final agency orders of removal, including reinstatement orders” under § 1252
• holding the court had “jurisdiction to review final agency orders of removal, including reinstatement orders” under § 1252

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).