Bear Lodge Multiple Use Ass'n v. Babbitt’s Empirical Analysis
175 F.3d 814 · 1999
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently August 2018
7 federal appellate · 10 district ·
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 Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Bennett v. Spear · United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP) · Department of Commerce v. United States House of Representatives
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““First, the plaintiff must have suffered an ‘injury in fact’&emdash;an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized, and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical. Second, there must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of&emdash;the injury has to be fairly ... trace[able] to the challenged action of the defendant, and not ... th[e] result [of] the independent action of some third party not before the court. Third, it must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In short, the Climbers “claim that the Constitution has been violated, [but] they claim nothing else. They fail to identify any personal injury suffered by them as a consequence of the alleged constitutional error.” Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 485 , 102 S.Ct. 752, 765 , 70 L.Ed.2d 700 (1982). The Climbers are clearly incensed by the NPS’ request that they voluntarily limit their climbing, but standing is not measured by the intensity of the litigant’s interest or the fervor of his advocacy. That concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues, is the anticipated consequence of proceedings commenced by one who has been injured in fact; it is not a permissible substitute for the showing of injury itself. Id. at 486 , 102 S.Ct. at 766 (internal quotations and citations omitted). Because they have alleged no injury as a result of their claim, the FCMP improperly establishes religion, we hold the Climbers have no standing to sue in this case. (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“USHPO”) make a determination of eligibility of Rainbow Bridge for the National Register of Historic Places as a site that has cultural significance based on its traditional and sacred values to Native Americans. (R. at 2036.) On March 17, 1992, the USHPO concurred with' the recommendation that Rainbow Bridge is eligible for listing. (Id.) In the Executive Order, federal agencies are required to:”
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.