Watkins v. Rupert’s Empirical Analysis
224 F.2d 47 · 1955
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently October 1971
5 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Estep v. United States · Witmer v. United States · Falbovs 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * Judicial intervention in the selective service selection system— in any case drastically limited, 50 U. S.C. Appendix, § 460(b) — must await the exhaustion by the registrant of all administrative remedies. The exact point at which such remedies have been fully utilized may not always be easy to ascertain, but no judicial review has ever been held appropriate before the registrant has responded, either affirmatively or negatively, to the order of induction. Falbo v. United States, 320 U.S. 549 , 64 S.Ct. 346 , 88 L.Ed. 305 ; Estep v. United States, 327 U.S. 114 , 66 S.Ct. 423 , 90 L.Ed. 567 ; Wit mer v. United States, 348 U.S. 375 , 75 S.Ct. 392 , 99 L.Ed. 428 . Certainly no adequate showing of danger of irreparable harm, prerequisite to any kind of injunctive relief, can be made so long as the registrant has not decided whether or not to obey the induction order and before the government has decided whether or not to prosecute if he decides not to report. And if plaintiff Watkins is unwilling to run the gamut of criminal prosecution, he can test the legality of his induction after he has submitted to it by suing out a writ of habeas corpus.””
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.