National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
301 U.S. 1 · 1937
Citation profile
2,065 federal appellate · 289 district · 637 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4,480 later decisions (362 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably United States v. Booker (2004), Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board (1938)
2,065 federal appellate · 289 district · 637 state decisions — followed in 45 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
reviewedNational Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. United States · Ala Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States · Virginian Ry Co v. System Federation No 40 · Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad
Cited together with Wickard v. Filburn · Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · United States v. Darby · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · NLRB v. Fain-Blatt
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 4,480 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“must be considered in the light of our dual system of government and may not be extended so as to embrace effects upon interstate commerce so indirect and remote that to embrace them, in view of our complex society, would effectually obliterate the distinction between what is national and what is local and create a completely centralized government.”
29 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'The cardinal principle of statutory construction is to save and not to destroy.'”
28 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The act does not interfere with the normal exercise of the right of the employer to select its employees or to discharge them. The employer may not, under cover of that right, intimidate or coerce its employees with respect to their self-organization and representation, and, on the other hand, the Board is not entitled to make its authority a pretext for interference with the right of discharge when that right is exercised for other reasons than such intimidation and coercion.”
19 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.