Chandler v. James’s Empirical Analysis
180 F.3d 1254 · 1999
Citation profile
12 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably Harris v. Garner (2000), Holloman ex rel. Holloman v. Harland (2004)
12 federal appellate ·
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 15 U.S.C. § 77T (§ 20 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 18 U.S.C. § 1509 · 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 242 · 18 U.S.C. § 401 · 18 U.S.C. § 402 · 20 U.S.C. § 4071 (The Equal Access Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District · Cantwell v. State of Connecticut
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the speech is not the State’s—either by attribution or by adoption.” Id. at 1261 . Unlike Z.H.’s speech here, the student speech at issue in Chandler was clearly”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“So long as school personnel do not participate in or actively supervise student-initiated speech, [the County School Board] cannot constitutionally prohibit students from speaking religiously....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[A] student's right to express his personal religious beliefs does not extend to using the machinery of the state as a vehicle for converting his audience.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.