State v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently November 2019
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 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
Relies on Shapiro v. Thompson · Central Hudson Gas Electric Corporation v. Public Service Commission of New York · M'Culloch v. State of Maryland · Dunn v. Blumstein · Board of Trustees of State Univ. of NY v. Fox
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[s]omething more than a negligible or minimal impact on the right to travel”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Thomas v. Haslam · Thomas v. Haslam“Sec. 337 (a) In General. — For purposes of the exception set forth in section 29(a)(2) of the International Air Transportation Competition Act of 1979 [the Wright Amendment] ..., the term “passenger capacity of 56 passengers or less" includes any aircraft, except aircraft exceeding gross aircraft weight of 300,000 pounds, reconfigured to accommodate 56 or fewer passengers if the total number of passenger seats installed on the aircraft does not exceed 56. (b) Inclusion of Certain States in Exemption. — The first sentence of section 29(c) of the International Air Transportation Competition Act of 1979 [the Wright Amendment] ... is amended by inserting "Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi,” before "and Texas”.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.