191 F. Supp. 2d 1135 - Cano v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited
1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1973 (§ 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965)
Relies on Reynolds v. Sims · Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo · Wesberry v. Sanders · Shaw v. Reno · Wise v. Lipscomb
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Blecause the conduct of elections is so essential to a state's political self-determination, the strong public interest in having elections go forward generally weighs heavily against an injunction that would postpone an upcoming election.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“enjoining an election is an 'extraordinary remedy' involving far-reaching power, which is almost never exercised by federal courts prior to a determination on the merits[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“redistricting and reapportioning legislative bodies is a legislative task which the courts should make every effort not to preempt.”
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.