People of the State of New York Ex Rel August Silz v. Henry Hesterberg’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 federal appellate · 29 district · 141 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 295 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““That a state may not pass laws directly regulating foreign or interstate commerce has frequently been held in the decisions of this court. But, while this is true, it has also been held in repeated instances that laws passed by the states in the exertion of their police power, not in conflict with laws of Congress upon the same subject, and indirectly or remotely affecting interstate commerce, are nevertheless valid laws. Missouri, K. & T. R. Co. v. Haber, 169 U.S. 613 , 18 S.Ct. 488 , 42 L.Ed. 878 ; Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Hughes, 191 U.S. 477 , 24 S.Ct. 132 , 48 L.Ed. 268 ; Asbell v. [State of] Kansas, 209 U.S. 251 , 28 S.Ct. 485 , 52 L.Ed. 778 , [14 Ann.Cas. 1101].””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Nelson · State v. Belknap

2. “[T]he legislature . . . is authorized to pass measures for the protection of the people . . . in the exercise of the police power, and is itself the judge of the necessity or expediency of the means adopted.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Andrus v. Allard · State v. Belknap

3. ““In order to protect local game during the closed season it has been found expedient to make possession of all such game during that time, whether taken within or without the state, a misdemeanor. In other states of the Union such laws have been deemed essential, and have been sustained by the courts. [Citing authorities.] It has been provided that the possession of certain kinds of game during the closed season shall be prohibited, owing to the possibility that dealers in game may sell birds of the domestic kind under the claim that they were taken in another state or country. The object of such laws is not to affect the legality of the taking of game in other states, but to protect the local game in the interest of the food supply of the people of the state. We cannot say that such purpose, frequently recognized • and acted upon, is an abuse of the police power of the state, and as such to be declared void because contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.’’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Graves v. Dunlap