Ball v. Madigan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “But in general, courts have deferred to legislative determinations that contribution restrictions are a necessary prophylactic measure in combatting potential corruption. In addition, the Supreme Court has instructed that the quantum of empirical evidence needed to satisfy heightened judicial scrutiny of legislative judgments will vary up or down with the novelty and plausibility of the justification raised.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Deon v. Barasch

2. “In determining whether a restriction is closely drawn, courts assess the means-end fit between the restriction and the asserted government interest. The restriction need not be the least restrictive means available of promoting the interest, but it must be reasonably proportional to the interest while avoiding needless infringement of First Amendment rights.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Deon v. Barasch

3. “to demonstrate the existence of a sufficiently important interest in prohibiting corruption in the medical cannabis industry. Id. at 1013. The Ball court next analyzed whether an outright ban on campaign contributions is closely drawn to avoid unnecessary abridgment of associational freedoms. Id. at 1013 (citations omitted). The court noted that”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Deon v. Barasch