James Lincoln’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

51 federal appellate · 16 district · 19 state decisions

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

1. ““We cannot suppose that Congress intended to compel those courts, by suc-li means, to draw to themselves, in thq first instance, the control of all criminal prosecutions commenced in state courts exercising authority within the same territorial limits, where the accused claims that he is held in custody in violation of the Constitution of the United States. The injunction to hear the case summarily, and thereupon ‘to dispose of the party as law and justice require,’ does not deprive the court of discretion as to the time and mode in which it will exert the powers conferred upon it. That discretion should he exercised in the light of the relations existing, under onr system of government, between the judicial tribunals of the Union and of the states, and in recognition of the fact that the public good requires that those relations be not disturbed by unnecessary conflict between courts equally bound to guard and protect rights secured by the Constitution. When the petitioner is in custody by state authority for an act done or omitted to be done in pursuance of a law of the United States, or of an order, process, or decree of a court or judge thereof; or where, being a subject or citizen of a foreign state, and domiciled therein, he is in custody under like authority, for an act done or omitted under any alleged right, title, authority, privilege, protection, or exemption under the commission, or order, or sanction, of any foreign state, or under color thereof, the validity and”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pundt v. Pendleton

2. “had already decided the question adversely to the contention of petitioner, so that a writ of error from that court would have accomplished nothing; and further, that the matter involved opened up inquiry into questions of great significance affecting the respective jurisdictions of the nation and the states over large numbers of Indians. There were special reasons, therefore, for our issuing a writ of habeas corpus and investigating the matter in that case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 48 Cal. 2d 851 - In Re Carmen

3. “assumed that the trial courts will follow the rulings of this court, and if there be in any case a departure therefrom the proper appellate court will correct the error.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 48 Cal. 2d 851 - In Re Carmen