Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 Md. 579 - Jackson v. Norris

Jackson v. Norris’s Empirical Analysis

1937

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
6
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Gisriel v. Ocean City Board of Supervisors of Elections (1997), 40 Cal. 3d 703 - Canaan v. Abdelnour (1985)

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 40 state decisions

80193719401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Bowers v. Smith · Norris v. Mayor of Baltimore · People ex rel. Hoyne v. McCormick · Arnsperger v. Crawford · State ex rel. Lamar v. Dillon

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

  1. “These arguments merely assume what they are supposed to prove: that the fee and certification requirements here in issue are "lawful,” "constitutional,” and "valid.” And even were we to accept this flawed reasoning, we believe nonetheless that it is simply not enough to say that the candidate should have paid the fee and become certified. Under Maryland’s system, a voter who writes in the name of someone who . is not running, which that voter has a right to do, does not have open to him any means of getting his vote included in the official tally. Limiting him in this manner eliminates his freedom to choose as he wishes. The following words of the Maryland Court of Appeals, written over fifty years ago, speak simply and directly to this point today: The right to vote is the right to choose the person for whom the ballot is cast. The election is not free if the elector may not make this choice. Nor does the exercise of this right depend upon either the wisdom, the expediency, or the futility of the choice.... If the power to choose is not according to the will of the elector, but limited to a choice of the candidates whose names are printed or otherwise appear on an official ballot, the voter's choice is no longer free.”
    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.