United States v. Bob Celestine’s Empirical Analysis
215 U.S. 278 · 1909
Citation profile
138 federal appellate · 66 district · 80 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 455 later decisions (79 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2025 · most notably United States v. Blue (1966), Donnelly v. United States (1913)
138 federal appellate · 66 district · 80 state decisions — followed in 13 states
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 United States v. Kagama · Kan-Gi-Shun-Ca · United States v. Rickert · Draper v. United States
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 455 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“when Congress has once established a reservation, all tracts included within it remain a part of the reservation until separated therefrom by Congress.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““A subjection of the individual Indian to the laws, both civil and criminal, of the state: no grant to him of the benefit of those laws? no denial of the personal jurisdiction of the United States.””
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““All Indians committing against the person or property of another Indian or other person any of the following crimes, namely, murder, manslaughter, rape, incest, assault with intent to kill, assault with a dangerous weapon, arson, burglary, robbery, and larceny on and within any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States Government, including rights of way running through the reservation, shall be subject to the same laws, tried in the same courts, and in the same manner, and be subject to the same penalties as are all other persons committing any of the above crimes within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States: Provided, That any Indian who commits the crime of rape upon any female Indian within the limits of any Indian reservation shall be imprisoned at the discretion of the court: Provided further, That as herein used the offense rape shall be defined in accordance with the laws of the State in which the offense was committed. “The foregoing shall extend to prosecutions of Indians in South Dakota under section 549 of this title. (Mar. 4, 1909, c. 321, § 328, 35 Stat. 1151 , as amended June 28, 1932, c. 284, 47 Stat. 337 .)””
2 later decisions 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.