Douglas v. City of Jeannette’s Empirical Analysis
319 U.S. 157 · 1943
Citation profile
522 federal appellate · 161 district · 76 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,462 later decisions (128 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2023 · most notably Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera (1966), Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York (1978)
522 federal appellate · 161 district · 76 state decisions — followed in 18 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
reviewedDouglas v. City of Jeannette (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization · Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire · Schneider v. State · Murdock v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania · Martin v. City of Struthers
Cited together with Dombrowski v. Pfister · Stefanelli v. Minard · Bailey v. Patterson · Younger v. Harris · Beal v. Missouri Pac Rr Corporation
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 1,462 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The power reserved to the states under the Constitution to provide for the determination of controversies iir their courts may be restricted by federal district courts only in obedience to Congressional legislation in conformity to the Judiciary Article of the Constitution. Congress, by its legislation, has adopted the policy, with certain well defined statutory exceptions, of leaving generally to the state courts the trial of criminal cases arising under state laws, subject to review by this Court of any federal questions involved. Hence, courts of equity in the exercise of their discretionary powers should conform to this policy by refusing to interfere with or; embarrass threatened proceedings in state courts save in those exceptional cases which call for the interposition of a court of equity to prevent irreparable injury which is clear and imminent; and equitable remedies infringing this independence of the states — though they might otherwise be given — should be withheld if sought on slight or inconsequential grounds, [citing cases].””
76 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.””
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'This Court is forever adding new stories to the temples of constitutional law, and the temples have a way of collapsing when one story too many is added.' Douglas v. Jeanette, 319 U.S. 157 , 181, 63 S.Ct. 877, 889, 87 L.Ed. 1324 (1943) (opinion of Jackson, J.). We decline to add yet another story to Miranda.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.