Halkin v. Helms’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 798 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 47 U.S.C. § 605 · 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Freedom of Information Act) · 50 U.S.C. § 403 (§ 102 of the National Security Act of 1947)
Relies on United States v. Nixon · Butz v. Economou · Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. · Alderman v. United States · United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(MINARET) applied not only to alleged foreign influence on domestic dissent but also on American groups and individuals whose activities 'may result in civil disturbances or otherwise subvert the national security of the U.S.' " Bk. III at 739. At its height, the watchlist contained the names of 600 Americans (1,200 names of Americans during the life of the program) and produced 2,000 reports disseminated to other agencies during the period 1967-1973. "NSA estimates 10 percent of these reports were derived from communications between two American citizens.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Halkin v. Helms“that, in view of matters which have to date been made public about the SHAMROCK source, the claim of privilege cannot be extended to preclude the federal defendants from admitting or denying the fact vel non of acquisition of a plaintiff's communications originated in the United States for transmission abroad, where it conclusively can be determined from records and materials now retained by NSA that such communication was obtained through the SHAMROCK source.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Halkin v. Helms“under the Freedom of Information Act gives further support to the need for an independent, De novo assessment of the government's claim of privilege. In amending FOIA in 1974, Congress explicitly rejected both the Supreme Court's decision in EPA v. Mink, 18 (limiting the courts' role in assessing security classifications under FOIA) and President Ford's argument in opposition to the amendments (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Halkin v. Helms
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.