134 S. Ct. 2518 - McCullen v. Coakley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

59 federal appellate · 27 district · 36 state decisions

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 191 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “burden substantially more speech than is necessary to further the government's legitimate interests.”

   18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Price v. City of Chi. · Evans v. Sandy City

2. “leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information.”

   15 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bruni v. City of Pittsburgh · Tschida v. Motl

3. “The tailoring requirement does not simply guard against an impermissible desire to censor. The government may attempt to suppress speech not only because it disagrees with the message being expressed, but also for mere convenience. Where certain speech is associated with particular problems, silencing the speech is sometimes the path of least resistance. But by demanding a close fit between ends and means, the tailoring requirement prevents the government from too readily sacrificing speech for efficiency.”

   8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Price v. City of Chi. · Evans v. Sandy City