Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 16 U.S. 610 - United States v. Palmer

United States v. Palmer’s Empirical Analysis

16 U.S. 610 · 1818

Citation profile

264
cited by 264 later decisions
86
cited 86 times by the Supreme Court
15
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

79 federal appellate · 16 district · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 264 later decisions (86 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably Baker v. Carr (1962), United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc. (1989)

79 federal appellate · 16 district · 20 state decisions — followed in 15 states

6001818182018301840185018601870188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Fairfax's Devisee v. Hunter's Lessee · Semmes v. Sprigg

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

  1. “to those objects to which the legislature intended to apply them”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “offenc[e] against the nation under whose flag the vessel sails, and within whose particular jurisdiction all on board the vessel are.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the rights of a part of a foreign empire, which asserts and is contending for its independence, and the conduct which must be observed by the courts of the Union towards the subjects of such section of an empire who may be brought before the tribunals of this country, are equally delicate and difficult. . . '. They belong more properly to those who can declare what the law shall be; who can place the nation in such a position with respect to foreign powers as, to their own judgment, shall appear wise; to whom are entrusted all its foreign relations, than to that tribunal whose power as well as duty is confined to the application of the rule which the legislature may prescribe for it. In such contests a nation may engage itself with .the one party Or the other; may observe absolute neutrality; may recognize the new state absolutely, or may make a limited recognition of it. It may be said generally, that if the government remains neutral and recognizes the existence of a civil war, its courts cannot consider as criminal those acts of hostility which war authorizes and which the new government may direct against its enemy. To decide otherwise would be to determine that the war prosecuted by one of the parties was unlawful,- and would be to'arraign the nation to which the court belongs against the party.”
    2 later decisions 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.