Sandoval v. Hagan’s Empirical Analysis
197 F.3d 484 · 1999
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably Alexander v. Sandoval (2001), James Alexander Director Alabama Department of Public Safetys v. Martha Sandoval (2001)
27 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 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
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Edelman v. Jordan · Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · Bonner v. City of Prichard
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“A State shall not be immune under the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitu tion of the United States from suit in Federal court for a violation of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 [ 29 U.S.C. § 794 ], title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 [ 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.], the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 [ 42 U.S.C. § 6101 et seq.], title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.], or the provisions of any other Federal statute prohibiting discrimination by recipients of Federal financial assistance.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In essence, then, we [have] held that Title VI [has] delegated to the agencies in the first instance the complex determination of what sorts of disparate impacts upon minorities constituted sufficiently significant social problems, and [are] readily enough remediable, to warrant altering the practices of the federal grantees that ha[ve] produced those impacts.”
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.