Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 223 F.3d 1244 - Hakim v. Hicks

Hakim v. Hicks’s Empirical Analysis

223 F.3d 1244 · 2000

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
July 2025
most recently cited

6 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently July 2025

6 federal appellate ·

140200020102020decided

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

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Turner v. Safley · Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. L Smith · City of Boerne v. Flores · O'Lone v. Estate of Shabazz · Harris v. Thigpen

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

  1. “(1) whether there is a “valid, rational connection” between the regulation and a legitimate governmental interest put forward to justify it; (2) whether there are alternative means of exercising the asserted constitutional right that remain open to the inmates; (3) whether and the extent to which accommodation of the asserted right will have an impact on prison staff, inmates, and the allocation of prison resources generally; and (4) whether the regulation represents an “exaggerated response” to prison concerns.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “to follow a dual-name policy on [the prisoner's] identification card and its use in obtaining prison services,” id. at 1252 , but did not order that the prisoner’s judgment of conviction be amended to reflect his new name. To the extent Appellant seeks to have the BOP follow a dual-name policy in his case — independent from the issue of amending his judgment — that is discussed infra. Meanwhile, Appellant’s implicit assertion that the district court failed”
    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.