Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 288 F.3d 732 - Grutter v. Bollinger

Grutter v. Bollinger’s Empirical Analysis

288 F.3d 732 · 2002

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
July 2021
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2021 · most notably Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), Johnson v. City of Cincinnati (2002)

14 federal appellate · 4 district ·

260200220102020decided

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

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 46

Relies on Gregg v. Georgia · Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al. · Miller v. California · Marks v. United States · Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Public confidence in this court or any other is premised on the certainty that the court follows the rules in every case, regardless of the question that a particular case presents. Unless we expose to public view our failures to follow the court's established procedures, our claim to legitimacy is illegitimate.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “flexible enough to consider all pertinent elements of diversity in light of the particular qualifications of each applicant, and to place them on the same footing for consideration, although not necessarily according them the same weight,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “Does the University of Michigan’s use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d), or 42 U.S.C. § 1981 ?”
    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.