Takao Ozawa v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
260 U.S. 178 · 1922
Citation profile
212 federal appellate · 65 district · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 573 later decisions (68 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably United States v. American Trucking Associations (1940), General Electric Co. v. Gilbert (1976)
212 federal appellate · 65 district · 28 state decisions — followed in 10 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedUnited States v. Rodiek (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Rector Etc of Holy Trinity Church v. United States · Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward · Davidson v. New Orleans · Wong Wing 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 573 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“plainly at variance with the policy of the legislation as a whole,”
22 later decisions quote this exact passage““It is the duty of this Court to give effect to the intent of Congress. Primarily this intent is ascertained by giving the words their natural significance, but if this leads to an unreasonable result plainly at variance with the policy of the legislation as a whole, we must examine the matter further. We may then look to the reason of the enactment and inquire into its antecedent history and give it effect in accordance with its design and purpose, sacrificing, if necessary, the literal meaning in order that the purpose may not fail.””
17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We are asked to conclude that Congress, without the consideration or recommendation of any committee, without a suggestion as to the effect, or a word of debate as to the desirability, of so fundamental a change, . . . has radically modified a statute always theretofore maintained and considered as of great importance. It is inconceivable that a rule . . ., a part of our history as well as our law, welded into the structure of our national policy by a century of legislative and administrative acts and judicial decisions, would have been deprived of its force in such dubious and casual fashion.”
1 later decision 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.