Sossamon v. Texas’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
82 federal appellate · 25 district · 16 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 20 U.S.C. § 1681 (§ 901 of the Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972) · 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000B · 42 U.S.C. § 2000C · 42 U.S.C. § 2000D · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 6101 (Age Discrimination Act of 1975)
Relies on Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida · Wisconsin v. Yoder · Hans v. State of Louisiana · Sherbert v. Verner
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 335 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Rather than require that the states adhere to a prescribed plan, the [Supreme] Court’s decisions envision a Constitution that affords the states discretion to waive or vary the nature and elements of their sovereign immunity. Consequently, courts must look to the law of the particular state in determining whether it has established a separate immunity against liability for purposes of waiver. Unlike a state’s waiver of its immunity from suit in federal court, the state’s waiver or retention of a separate immunity from liability is not a matter in which there is an overriding federal interest justifying the application of a federal rule. For these reasons, we conclude that the Constitution permits a state whose law provides that it possesses-an immunity from liability separate from its immunity from suit to show that its waiver of one does not affect its enjoyment of the other.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“targets two areas of state and local action: land use regulation, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc (RLUIPA § 2), and restrictions on the religious exercise of institutionalized persons, § 2000cc-l (RLUIPA § 3).” Sossamon v. Texas, 563 U.S. 277 , 131 S.Ct. 1651 , 1656, 179 L.Ed.2d 700 (2011). It”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A state shall not be immune under the Eleventh Amendment [from liability] for a violation of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ... or the provisions of any other Federal statute prohibiting discrimination by recipients of Federal financial assistance.”
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.