Ince v. Rockefeller’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

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

1. ““ * * * Pleas for separate community recognition, similar to those raised by plaintiffs here, were made by intervenors from Flatbush and Bay Ridge in contesting the recently enacted congressional districts in New York State. In rejecting their contentions, the three-judge Court in its unanimous opinion in Wells v. Rocke feller, 281 F.Supp. 821, 825 (S.D.N.Y.1968) stated: ‘The Legislature cannot be expected to satisfy, by its redistricting action, the personal political ambitions or the district preferences of all of our citizens. For everyone on the wrong side of the line, there may well be his counterpart on the right side. The twenty or more identifiable communities of Brooklyn may well have preserved their own traditions from the days of the Dutch, although in today’s rapidly changing world, this is doubtful. But even Brooklyn’s large population will not support twenty community congressmen. Of necessity, there must be lines which divide.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 377 F. Supp. 1164 - United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburgh, Inc. v. Wilson

2. “. . . (T)he complaint appears as an unabashed plea for segregation in the composition of Assembly Districts, for color consciousness rather than for color blindness. Speaking in a different context, Mr. Justice Douglas has emphasized the repugnance of such a plea to the principles of democracy: `Racial boroughs (like rotten boroughs), are . . . at war with democratic standards.' Wright v. Rockefeller, 376 U.S. 52, 62 , 84 S.Ct. 603, 609 , 11 L.Ed.2d 512 (1964) (dissenting opinion). Any purposeful attempt to maintain a majority of persons of one race within a given district would, in fact, raise grave constitutional questions. Wright v. Rockefeller, 211 F.Supp. 460, 468-469 (S.D.N.Y.1962) (concurring opinion of Feinberg, J.) aff'd. 376 U.S. 52 , 84 S.Ct. 603 , 11 L.Ed.2d 512 (1964).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 342 F. Supp. 463 - David v. Cahill