Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 186 F.2d 183 - Carlson v. Landon

Carlson v. Landon’s Empirical Analysis

186 F.2d 183 · 1950

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
September 1990
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 1990 · most notably Carlson v. Landon (1952), Hunt v. Roth (1981)

22 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

29019501960197019801990decided

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 50 U.S.C. § 781

Relies on Whitten v. Tomlinson · United States v. Grayson · In Re Smith · United States ex rel. Potash v. District Director of Immigration & Naturalization · United States ex rel. Zapp v. District Director of Immigration & Naturalization

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

  1. “Id. at 188. 48 The District Director of the I.N.S. had stated that he had reasonable cause to believe that Carlson's release would be prejudicial to the public interest and would endanger the welfare and safety of the United States. But this assertion was insufficient:”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “some fact upon which a reasonable person could logically conclude that the denial of bail is required to protect the country or to secure the alleged alien's presence for deportation should an order to that effect be the result of the hearing.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “does not give the Attorney General or the Director absolute and final power to deny bail. Instead ... [the provision] left bail to the discretion of the Attorney General rather than to his unlimited power to deny it....”
    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.