Bailey v. Richardson’s Empirical Analysis
182 F.2d 46 · 1950
Citation profile
84 federal appellate · 14 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 166 later decisions (9 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2018 · most notably Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972), Elrod v. Burns (1976)
84 federal appellate · 14 district · 14 state decisions
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 29 U.S.C. § 159 (§ 9 of the National Labor Relations Act)
Relies on Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp. · Thornhill v. Alabama · Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co. · United Public Workers of America v. Mitchell · Stromberg v. People of State of California
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 166 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““No function is more completely internal to a branch of government than the selection and retention or dismissal of its employees. * * * “In the absence of statute or ancient custom to the contrary, executive offices are held at the will of the appointing authority, not for life or for fixed terms. If removal be at will, of what purpose would process be? To hold office at the will of a superior and to be removable therefrom only by constitutional due process of law are opposite and inherently conflicting ideas. Due process of law is not applicable unless one is being deprived of something to which he has a right.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““[T]he plain hard fact is that so far as the Constitution is concerned there is no prohibition against the dismissal of Government employees because of their political beliefs, activities or affiliations. That document, standing alone, does not prevent Republican Presidents from dismissing Democrats (or vice versa) . . . . [I]t has not continued to so great am extent because the people became convinced that it was not good government and the Congress and the President wrote that view into statutes and regulations. They, not the Constitution, give Government employees such protection as they have against dismissal for political reasons” 182 F.2d at 59 .”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“(t)he petitioner may have a constitutional right to talk politics, but he has no constitutional right to be a policeman.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.