Associated Press v. National Labor Relations Board’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

301 federal appellate · 36 district · 138 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 791 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “no special immunity from the application of general laws”

   10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. City of Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. · Cohen v. Cowles Media Co.

2. ““The act does not compel the petitioner to employ any one; it does not require that the petitioner retain in its employ an incompetent editor or one who fails faithfully to edit the news to reflect the facts without bias or prejudice. The act permits a discharge for any reason other than union activity Or agitation for collective bargaining with employees. The restoration of Watson to his former position in no sense guarantees his continuance in petitioner’s employ. The petitioner is at liberty, whenever occasion may arise, to exercise its undoubted right to sever his relationship for any cause that seems to it proper save only as a punishment for, or discouragement of, such activities as the act declares permissible.””

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Vokas Provision Co. v. National Labor Relations Board · Standard Lime & Stone Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

3. “The conclusion which the petitioner draws is that whatever may be the case with respect to employees in its mechanical departments it must have absolute and unrestricted freedom to employ and to discharge those who, like Watson, edit the news, that there must not be the slightest opportunity for any bias or prejudice personally entertained by an editorial employee to color or to distort what he writes, and that the Associated Press cannot be free to furnish unbiased and impartial news reports unless it is equally free to determine for itself the partiality or bias of editorial employees. So it is said that any regulation protective of union activities, or the right collectively to bargain on the part of such employees, is necessarily an invalid invasion of the freedom of the press.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. National Labor Relations Board v. Catholic Bishop · 7 Cal. 5th 871 - Wilson v. Cable News Network, Inc.