Jean-Louis v. Attorney General of the United States

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “deference is not owed to Silva-Trevino’s novel approach” due to the fact that “it is bottomed on an impermissible reading” of the INA
• noting that “moral turpitude” will rarely, if ever, be “an element of the underlying offense”
• observing that importation of the “realistic probability” test to the CIMT context is “wrong-headed”
• declining to remand where the relevant legal materials, including BIA decisions, “lead[ ] inexorably to the conclusion” that'an offense is not morally turpitudinous
• declining to import the Duenas-Alvarez realistic probability test into the crime involving moral turpitude context
• rejecting “Silva–Trevino’s novel approach” in favor of “the modified categorical approach that we have historically applied”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).