LaFontant v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “jurisdictional change from an Article III court to an administrative decision maker is simply a change” in who hears the case
• holding that INS detainee is not a prisoner under the PLRA
• holding that PLRA fee requirements do not a Aprisoner@
• AEDPA § 440(a), amended by IIR-IRA § 306(d), which barred review by any court of deportation order for alien convicted of specified offenses, applicable to pending cases; citing, inter alia, Salazar-Haro v. INS, 95 F.3d 309, 311 (3d Cir. 1996
• employing same reasoning and reaching the same conclusion
• employing same reasoning and reaching the same conclusion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).