222 Ill. 2d 123 - People v. Olender’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
August 2025
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 202 Ill. 2d 89 - People v. Boclair · People ex rel. Drake v. Mahaney · 186 Ill. 2d 1 - People v. Reedy · 176 Ill. 2d 499 - Johnson v. Edgar · 63 Ill. 2d 1 - People v. Mayberry
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`[t]here is no one provision or feature of the act that is challenged as unconstitutional, such that the defect could be remedied by a subsequent amendment which simply deleted or altered that provision or feature.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“provisions in Public Act 96-34 which clearly violate the intent and purpose of the single subject rule. On the Act's face, all of the provisions have a natural and logical connection to the single subject of capital projects. ¶ 43 Furthermore, a review of the extensive legislative debate preceding the enactment of Public Act 96-34 supports our conclusion that the Act does not violate the single subject clause. Given that the single subject rule is intended to”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“ensures that the legislature addresses the difficult decisions it faces directly and subject to public scrutiny, rather than passing unpopular measures on the backs of popular ones.”
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.