State v. Mooney’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
17 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 812 (§ 202 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1996A
Relies on City of St. Louis v. Praprotnik · Morton v. Mancari · Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. L Smith · United States v. Lanier · Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]n construing statutes, we are obligated to avoid interpretations that conflict with relevant constitutional mandates.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[Wle have a duty to construe statutes to avoid constitutional conflicts.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution authorizes Congress to preempt state law in areas covered by federal legislation, rendering invalid any state statute that conflicts with a federal act of preemption.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.