Granzeier v. Middleton’s Empirical Analysis
173 F.3d 568 · 1999
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Williams v. Lara (2001), Adland v. Russ (2002)
18 federal appellate · 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 5 U.S.C. § 6103
Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Hensley v. Eckerhart · McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Lemon v. Kurtzman · Farrar v. Hobby
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The purpose prong of the Lemon test asks whether government’s actual purpose is to endorse or disapprove of religion. The effect prong asks whether, irrespective of government’s actual purpose, the practice under review in fact conveys a message of endorsement or disapproval. An affirmative answer to either question should render the challenged practice invalid.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“In considering the purpose prong ... the focus of the inquiry is on the intentions of the government. Namely, did the government intend to convey a message of endorsement or disapproval of religion when it implemented the challenged policy. . Courts should generally be deferential to the government’s articulation of a secular purpose. The government’s secular purpose, however, must be sincere and not a mere sham. Although the government’s purpose need not be exclusively secular, a practice will violate the Establishment Clause if it is entirely motivated by a purpose to advance religion.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“the fact that a particular closing was once constitutionally suspect does not prevent it from being reinstated in a constitutional form.”
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.