Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 139 MINN 267 - State v. Holm

State v. Holm’s Empirical Analysis

1918

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
9
states following
December 1963
most recently cited

1 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1963

1 district · 14 state decisions

70191819201930194019501960decided

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 Ex parte Siebold · Thomas Patterson v. People of the State of Colorado Ex Rel Attorney General of the State of Colorado · Davis v. Beason · Grafton v. United States · Ed Reid v. People of the State of Colorado

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

  1. ““Where, after full discussion, the CQntention was rejected that the Espionage Law * * 9 abrogated or superseded the statute, the court declaring that the fact that the citizens of (he state are also citizens of the United States and owe a duty to the nation, does not absolve them from duty to the state nor preclude a state from enforcing such duty. ‘The same act,’ it was said, ‘maybe an offense or transgression of the laws of both’ nation and stale, and both may punish it without a conflict of their sovereignties.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “These constitutional provisions preserve the right to speak and to publish without previously submitting for official approval the matter to be spoken or published, but do not grant immunity to those who abuse this privilege, nor prevent the state from making it a penal offense to publish or advocate matters or measures inimical to the public welfare.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.