Johannessen v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
225 U.S. 227 · 1912
Citation profile
126 federal appellate · 132 district · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 519 later decisions (74 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Klapprott v. United States (1949), Costello v. United States (1961)
126 federal appellate · 132 district · 41 state decisions — followed in 12 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 Hilton v. Guyot · Calder et Wife, v. Bull et Wife. · United States v. Throckmorton · Southern Pacific Railroad v. United States · Ex parte Garland
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 519 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"That it shall be the duty of the United States district attorneys for the respective districts, upon affidavit showing good cause therefor, to institute proceedings in any court having jurisdiction to naturalize aliens in the judicial district in which the naturalized citizen may reside at the time of bringing the suit, for the purpose of setting aside and canceling the certificate of citizenship on the ground of fraud or on the ground that such certificate * * * was illegally procured. In any such proceeding the party holding the certificate of citizenship alleged to have been fraudulently or illegally procured shall have sixty days personal notice in which to make answer to the petition of the United States. * * ' * ””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““An alien friend is offered under certain conditions the privilege of citizenship. He may accept the offer and become a citizen upon compliance with the prescribed conditions, but not otherwise. His claim is of favor, not of right. He can only become a citizen upon and after a strict compliance with the acts of Congress. An applicant for this high privilege is bound, therefore, to conform to the terms upon which alone the right he seeks can be conferred. It is his province, and he is bound, to see that the jurisdictional facts upon which the grant is predicated actually exist””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Brefo · In re Goldberg“an instrument granting political privileges, and open like other public grants to be revoked if and when it shall be found to have been unlawfully or fraudulently procured.”
5 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.