Crowther v. Seaborg’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2000 · most notably Sierra Club v. Morton (1972), Nader v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1975)
8 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2342 · 42 U.S.C. § 2012 · 42 U.S.C. § 2013 · 42 U.S.C. § 2051 · 42 U.S.C. § 2231 · 42 U.S.C. § 2239 (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009) · 5 U.S.C. § 551 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946) · 5 U.S.C. § 559 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946)
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp · Flast v. Cohen · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · William Marbury v. James Madison
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Radiation protection standards are established by the various agencies through a complex process. This process entails the review and evaluation of studies of the biological effects of radiation. These studies attempt to ascertain the risk to humans from radiation exposure. The agencies also study the utilization of radioactive processes and materials in order to establish the benefits to be derived from radiation exposure. The setting of exposure standards at a given level requires the weighing of these risks and benefits to be derived therefrom. The weighing requires a value judgment as well as a measuring, and thus the standards are not scientific numbers below which no danger exists. The value judgment embodies complex social and political considerations, for atomic energy has a potential that suggests unlimited benefits to entire nations and presents a risk to entire populations of people, and perhaps their progeny.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““Defendants urge . . . that the phrase ‘as the Commission may determine’ places the nature of the arrangements within the agency discretion. The Court agrees with this construction of the statutory language. We note, however, that provision for health and safety is mandatory, since the language is ‘shall contain’. Thus, the statute requires provision for health and safety, but the exact nature of the arrangements is lodged in the discretion of the AEC.” Id. at 1220 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“There are two exceptions to the gen-' eral rule. A suit is not barred by sovereign immunity if (1) it alleges that the actions of the officers challenged are beyond their statutory authority, or (2) it alleges that although acting within the scope of their authority, the powers exercised, or the manner in which they are exercised, are constitutionally void.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.