Hall v. Clinton’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 6 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 594 · 28 U.S.C. § 516 · 28 U.S.C. § 517 · 3 U.S.C. § 105 · 5 U.S.C. § 1201 (Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989) · 5 U.S.C. § 2104
Relies on Heckler v. Chaney · Bush v. Lucas · In re Debs · Halberstam v. Welch · Tioga Co v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania New York L E
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Assistance and services ... are authorized to be provided to the spouse of the President in connection with assistance provided by such spouse to the President in the discharge of the President's duties and responsibilities.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hall v. Clinton“empowered to provide representation whenever in his opinion [the United States’] interests may be jeopardized,” and further explaining that this decisions is”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“`as a matter of substantive law, one cannot be liable for a conspiracy that does not have as its object an actionable wrong.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hall v. Clinton
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.