Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 176 U.S. 83 - Henry Bolln v. State of Nebraska

Henry Bolln v. State of Nebraska’s Empirical Analysis

176 U.S. 83 · 1900

Citation profile

178
cited by 178 later decisions
16
cited 16 times by the Supreme Court
21
states following
May 1989
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 5 district · 97 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 178 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1989 · most notably Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1934), Albert Twining v. State of New Jersey (1908)

21 federal appellate · 5 district · 97 state decisions — followed in 21 states

270190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Hurtado v. People of the State of California · Dent v. State of West Virginia · Kemmler · Holden v. Hardy · Hagar v.

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

  1. “‘ ‘ Wherefore, the petitioner further states that while white electors are regularly selected to serve as regular members of the Petit Jury Panel at each term of the Jefferson Circuit Court, no Negroes have been selected and that said Negro electors have been systematically excluded from serving as regular members of the Petit Jury Panel in said Jefferson County Circuit Court for a half century solely because they are Negroes. The defendant charges that this constitutes a discrimination against him, a Negro, and such discrimination is a denial to him of equal protection of the laws of the United States of America as guaranteed by Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. Petitioner further alleges-that due process of law is being denied him by the State of Arkansas, through its Administrative Officers, and prays that present Petit Jury Panel be quashed.”-”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “on an equal footing with the original States”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Upon the admission of a state it becomes entitled to and possesses all the rights of dominion and sovereignty which belonged to the original states, and, in the language of the act of 1867 admitting the state of Nebraska, it stands ‘upon an equal footing with the original states in all respects whatsoever.’ ””
    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.