Schneider v. State’s Empirical Analysis
308 U.S. 147 · 1939
Citation profile
802 federal appellate · 268 district · 791 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3,068 later decisions (427 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably Younger v. Harris (1971), New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)
802 federal appellate · 268 district · 791 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.
Relationships
Relies on Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization · Lovell v. City of Griffin · Stromberg v. People of State of California · Whitney v. People of State of California
Cited together with Cantwell v. State of Connecticut · Lovell v. City of Griffin · Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization · Thornhill v. Alabama · Martin v. City of Struthers
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 3,068 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“one is not to have the exercise of his liberty of expression in appropriate places abridged on the plea that it may be exercised in some other place.”
145 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The ordinance is comprehensive with respect to1 the method of distribution. It covers every sort of circulation ‘either by hand or otherwise.’ There is thus no restriction in its application with respect to time or place. It is not limited to ways which might be regarded as inconsistent with the maintenance of public order, or as involving disorderly conduct, the molestation of the inhabitants, or the misuse or littering of the streets. The ordinance prohibits the distribution of literature of any kind at any time, at any place, and in any manner without a permit from the city manager. ‘We think that the ordinance is invalid on its face. Whatever the motive which induced its adoption, its character is such that it strikes at the very foundation of the freedom of the press by subjecting it to license and censorship. The struggle for the freedom of the press was primarily directed against the power of the licensor. It was against that power that John Milton directed his assault by his ‘Appeal for the Liberty of Unlicensed Printing.’ And the liberty of the press became initially a right to publish ‘without a license what formerly could be published only with one.’ While this freedom from previous restraint upon publication cannot be regarded as exhausting the guaranty of liberty, .the prevention of that restraint was a leading purpose in the adoption of the constitutional provision. * * * “The liberty of the press is not confined to newspapers and periodicals. It necessarily em”
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.