United States v. Martin’s Empirical Analysis
14 F. 817 · 1883
Citation profile
3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1972
3 district ·
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 Samuel Worcester v. The State of Georgia · United States v. McBratney · United States v. Forty-three Gallons of Whiskey · State v. Doxtater · Palcher v. United States
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In our opinion, .that definition now applies to all the country to which the Indian title has not been extinguished, witiiin the limits of the United States, even when not witiiin a reservation expressly set apart for the exclusive occupancy of Indians, although much of it has been acquired since the passage of the act of 1834, and notwithstanding the formal definition in that act lias been dropped from the statutes, excluding, however, any territory embraced within the exterior geographical limits of a state, not excepted from its jurisdiction by treaty or by statute at the time of its admission into the Union, but saving even in respect to territory not thus excepted, and actually in the exclusive occupancy of Indians, the authority of congress over it under the constitutional power to regulate commerce with the Indian tribes, and under any treaty made in pursuance of it.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Upon the national government is devolved the power and duty to supervise and control the intercourse between the Indians and its citizens, so that, as far as possible, each may bo protected from wrong and injury by the other, and in the exercise of this power and the performance of this duty it is not limited or restrained by the fact that the Indians are within the limits of a state.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““The preceding section shall not be construed to extend to crimes committed by one Indian against the person or property of another Indian, nor to any Indian committing any offense in the Indian country who has been punished by the local law of the tribe,” etc.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ex parte Hart
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.