Juan Ramon Sol v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

How courts have described this case

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

• reasoning that a “fact-intensive review is vastly different from what the habeas statute plainly provides: review for statutory or constitutional errors”
• noting that Sol “d[id] not raise a statutory ... claim”
• declining to review noncitizen’s assertion that “the decisions of the IJ . . . lacked adequate support in the record” because “federal jurisdiction over [section] 2241 petitions does not extend to review of discretionary determinations by the IJ”
• “Sol, however does not raise a statutory or constitutional claim.' He simply contends that the decisions of the IJ and the BIA lacked adequate support in the record.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).