Pulphus v. Ayers’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 2 U.S.C. § 2001
Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Elrod v. Burns · Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation · Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. · Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As to the message any elephant or donkey conveyed, this was no more the government's speech than are the thoughts contained in the books of a city's library.... Those who check out a Tolstoy or Dickens novel would not suppose that they will be reading a government message. But in the case of a public library, as in the case of the Party Animals exhibit, there is still government speech. With respect to the public library, the government speaks through its selection of which books to put on the shelves and which books to exclude. In the case before us, the Commission spoke when it determined which elephant and donkey models to include in the exhibition and which not to include. In using its 'editorial discretion in the selection and presentation of' the elephants and donkeys, the Commission thus 'engage[d] in speech activity'; 'compilation of the speech of third parties' is a communicative act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Raven v. Sajet“(1) whether the medium at issue has historically been used to communicate messages from the government; (2) whether the public reasonably interprets the government to be the speaker; and (3) whether the government maintains editorial control over the speech.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Raven v. Sajet“the public would reasonably associate the art competition, and the art displayed ... with the government[.] ... Art displayed on public property is often treated as being endorsed by the government or representative of the government's views”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Raven v. Sajet
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.