Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 201 Md. 212 - Salsburg v. State

Salsburg v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1953

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
October 2001
most recently cited

4 district · 39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2001 · most notably Salsburg v. State of Maryland (1954), Mulcahy v. State (1960)

4 district · 39 state decisions

130195319601970198019902000decided

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 Weeks v. United States · Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. · Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado · Royster Guano Co v. Commonwealth of Virginia · Slaughter-House Cases the Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans v. The Crescent City Live

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

  1. “"The Equal Protection Clause contemplates the protection of persons or classes of persons against unjust discrimination by the State, but it has no reference to municipal or territorial arrangements made for different portions of the State that do not injuriously affect or discriminate between persons or classes of persons within the municipalities or counties for which such regulations are made. The State can establish any system of laws it sees fit for all or any part of its territory, provided that it does not encroach on the jurisdiction of the United States, and does not abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, or deprive any person of due process of law or equal protection of the laws. Thus it has been held that the Legislature has the power to declare that certain acts are criminal in some counties but not in others. Davis v. State, 68 Ala. 58 , 44 Am. Rep. 128 , 132; People v. Hanrahan, 75 Mich. 611 , 42 N.W. 1124 . For instance, the equal protection of the laws is not denied by a State local option law under which the traffic in intoxicating liquors may be made a crime in certain territory and permitted elsewhere. State of Ohio ex rel. Lloyd v. Dollison, 194 U.S. 445 , 24 S.Ct. 703 , 48 L.Ed. 1062 ." 201 Md. at 222-23 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “its own modes of judicial proceeding [and] ... [i]f diversities of laws and judicial proceedings may exist in the several States without violating the equality clause in the 14th Amendment, there is no solid reason why there may not be such diversities in different parts of the same State.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A] classification made by a Legislature is presumed to be reasonable in the absence of clear and convincing indications to the contrary, and the person who assails it has the burden of showing that it does not rest upon any reasonable basis, but is essentially arbitrary.”
    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.