State Board of Equalization v. Young's Market Co.’s Empirical Analysis
299 U.S. 59 · 1936
Citation profile
68 federal appellate · 43 district · 144 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 444 later decisions (72 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2022 · most notably Craig v. Boren (1976), California Retail Liquor Dealers Assn. v. Midcal Aluminum, Inc. (1980)
68 federal appellate · 43 district · 144 state decisions — followed in 26 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.
Relationships
Relies on Slaughter-House Cases the Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans v. The Crescent City Live · James Clark Distilling Company v. Western Maryland Railway Company · In re Rahrer · Scott v. Donald
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 444 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The plaintiffs ask us to limit this broad command [of § 2]. They request us to construe the Amendment as saying, in effect: The State may prohibit the importation of intoxicating liquors provided it prohibits the manufacture and sale within its borders; but if it permits such manufacture and sale, it must let imported liquors compete with the domestic on equal terms. To say that, would involve not a construction of the Amendment, but a rewriting of it."”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[p]rior to the Twenty-First Amendment it would ... have been unconstitutional”
3 later decisions 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.