State Ex Rel. Clark v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 12 district · 115 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 136 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably Gallegos v. Pueblo of Tesuque (2002), Sears v. Hull (1998)
9 federal appellate · 12 district · 115 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
Applies 25 U.S.C. § 2704 (§ 5 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988) · 25 U.S.C. § 2710 (§ 11 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988)
Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · United States v. Lopez · William Marbury v. James Madison · Morton v. Mancari · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Chadha
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 136 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“authority under New Mexico law to enter into the compacts and agreements absent legislative authorization or ratification”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“because the compact strikes a detailed and specific balance between the respective roles of the State and the Tribe in such important matters as the regulation of Class III gaming activities, the licensing of its operators, and the respective civil and criminal jurisdictions of the State and the Tribe necessary for the enforcement of state or tribal laws or regulations.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.