Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 226 F.3d 851 - Clinton A. Krislov v. Wanda L. Rednour

Clinton A. Krislov v. Wanda L. Rednour’s Empirical Analysis

226 F.3d 851 · 2000

Citation profile

87
cited by 87 later decisions
8
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

36 federal appellate · 8 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Anita Lerman Angelo D'Angelo v. Board of Elections in the City of New York (2000), St. John's United Church of Christ v. City of Chicago (2007)

36 federal appellate · 8 district · 8 state decisions

510200020102020decided

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 Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Warth v. Seldin · Buckley v. Valeo · Roth v. United States · Ward v. Rock Against Racism

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

  1. “[B]y preventing the candidates from using signatures gathered by [non-resident] circulators . . . , the law inhibits the expressive utility of associating with these individuals because these potential circulators cannot invite voters to sign the candidates' petitions in an effort to gain ballot access.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “if it also preclude[s] the candidate from utilizing a large class of potential solicitors to convey his message, or if it substantially restrict[s] the candidate's ability to choose the means of conveying his message.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Laws imposing severe burdens must be narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests, but lesser burdens receive less exacting scrutiny.”
    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.