Faulkner v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
10 F.3d 226 · 1993
Citation profile
47
cited by 47 later decisions
1
states following
April 2024
most recently cited
20 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably Multi-Channel TV Cable Co. v. Charlottesville Quality Cable Operating Co. (1994), Jeanie Mentavlos v. John Justice Anderson (2001)
20 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al. · Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education · Brown v. Board of Education · Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We remanded the case to the district court with instructions to elicit a plan from the state complying with the Fourteenth Amendment. We allowed for the possibility that a plan could still permit VMI to remain a state-supported, single-sex institution, if that were the will of Virginia, so long as women were offered a parallel program, (citations omitted). The order in VMI did not, however, direct that any parallel program which the state might choose to provide be identical for both men and women. * * * * * * [A]ny analysis of [a parallel program] in response to a justified purpose must take into account the nature of the difference on which the separation is based, the relevant benefits to the needs of each gender, the demand (both in terms of quality and quantity), and any other relevant factor. In the end, distinctions in any separate facilities provided for males and females may be based on real differences between the sexes, both in quality and quantity, so long as the distinctions are not based on stereotyped or generalized perceptions of differences.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A regulatory classification which is made for a purpose unrelated to the purpose of the regulation, or which is broader than that appropriate for the regulation, may reveal prejudice and define discrimination.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. United States v. Commonwealth of Virginia George F. Allen, Governor, of the Commonwealth of Virginia Virginia Military Institute Joseph M. Spivey, Iii, President of the Virginia Military Institute Board of Visitors John Williams Knapp, Superintendent of Virginia Military Institute the Board of Visitors of Virginia Military Institute Vmi Foundation, Incorporated Vmi Alumni Association the Virginia State Council of Higher Education and Its Members and Officers Thomas N. Downing Elizabeth P. Hoisington, Brig. Gen. Robert Q. Marston a Courtland Spotts, Iii, Daniel F. Flowers B. Powell Harrison, Jr. Robert H. Spilman Samuel E. Woolwine James W. Enochs, Jr. William A. Hazel Harvey S. Sadow Douglas K. Baumgartner Daniel D. Cameron Glen N. Jones John W. Roberts, and Gordon K. Davies, the National Women's Law Center American Association of University Women American Civil Liberties Union California Women's Law Center Center for Women Policy Studies Connecticut Women's Education and Legal Fund Equal Rights Advocates Federally Employed Women, Inc. Feminist Majority Foundation Human Rights Campaign Fund Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under Law National Association for Girls & Women in Sport National Association of Commissions for Women National Council of Negro Women National Education Association National Gay and Lesbian Task Force National Hookup of Black Women National Organization for Women Now Legal Defense and Education Fund National Women's Conference Committee National Women's Party Northwest Women's Law Center Trial Lawyers for Public Justice Women Employed Women's Law Project Women's Legal Defense Fund Ywca of the U.S.A. Mary Baldwin College Wells College Saint Mary's College Southern Virginia College, Amici Curiae. United States of America v. Commonwealth of Virginia George F. Allen, Governor, of the Commonwealth of Virginia Virginia Military Institute Joseph M. Spivey, Iii, President of the Virginia Military Institute Board of Visitors John Williams Knapp, Superintendent of Virginia Military Institute the Board of Visitors of Virginia Military Institute Vmi Foundation, Incorporated Vmi Alumni Association the Virginia State Council of Higher Education and Its Members and Officers Thomas N. Downing Elizabeth P. Hoisington, Brig. Gen. Robert Q. Marston a Courtland Spotts, Iii, Daniel F. Flowers B. Powell Harrison, Jr. Robert H. Spilman Samuel E. Woolwine James W. Enochs, Jr. William A. Hazel Harvey S. Sadow Douglas K. Baumgartner Daniel D. Cameron Glen N. Jones John W. Roberts, and Gordon K. Davies, the National Women's Law Center American Association of University Women American Civil Liberties Union California Women's Law Center Center for Women Policy Studies Connecticut Women's Education and Legal Fund Equal Rights Advocates Federally Employed Women, Inc. Feminist Majority Foundation Human Rights Campaign Fund Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under Law National Association for Girls & Women in Sport National Association of Commissions for Women National Council of Negro Women National Education Association National Gay and Lesbian Task Force National Hookup of Black Women National Organization for Women Now Legal Defense and Education Fund National Women's Conference Committee National Women's Party Northwest Women's Law Center Trial Lawyers for Public Justice Women Employed Women's Law Project Women's Legal Defense Fund Ywca of the U.S.A. Mary Baldwin College Wells College Saint Mary's College Southern Virginia College, Amici Curiae · United States v. Virginia“A resolution adopted in May 1993 by both houses of the legislature embraced all the positive contributions of The Citadel and reaffirmed a policy of providing its benefits only to males. While the announced South Carolina policy reaffirms The Citadel's positive contributions, it does not connect these values to a male-only characteristic. Rather, the values stated in the resolution would appear to relate to a single-gender policy for institutions. The resolution also offers no explanation for the failure to offer women the same opportunity to participate in a single-gender institution and achieve similar goals as that afforded to men at The Citadel. Although South Carolina has appointed a committee to review the absence of opportunity for women, the committee will not report to the legislature until January 1994.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.