Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that AEDPA S 440(d) does not apply retroactively to cases pending on the date of AEDPA's enactment
• explaining that the BIA’s decision as to the effective date of a statute does not receive Chevron deference because the issue “is not one that implicates agency expertise in a meaningful way”
• applying presumption against retroactivity as one of “traditional tools of statutory construction” Chevron directs courts to apply in ascertaining Congress’ intent
• declining to reach the Equal Protection issue because Section 440(d) was found inapplicable to the petitioner
• examining the propositions established by the Supreme Court in Felker, Yerger, and McCardle
• explaining that “a title alone is not controlling”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).