Sobell v. Reed’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 federal appellate · 5 district · 5 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Whatever may once have been the case, it is not doubtful now that the Constitution, and notably the First Amendment, reaches inside prison walls. The freedoms of conscience, of thought and expression, like all the rest of life, are cramped and diluted for the inmate. But they exist to the fullest extent consistent with prison discipline, security and ‘the punitive regimen of a prison. . . . ’ ” at 1303.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Trisvan v. Annucci · Newkirk v. Butler

2. “It is wholly clear — indeed, there is no contrary suggestion — that the concern of the Parole Board is not about travel as such. Travel may, of course, pose special problems of parole supervision, but the focus of the Board’s actions in this case is upon Sobell’s plans for speech and association when he travels. ****** Finally, to highlight that the subject is speech and assembly rather than travel, Board Chairman Reed, while expressing only his own view, says he ‘would recommend that the Board deny permission for Morton Sobell to address and associate with persons en gaged in fund raising activities for People’s World’ even if such an address and association involved no travel outside New York City. The Chairman does not indicate where in the Conditions of Parole (supra note 2 ) he would find grounds for so restricting Sobell’s right ‘to address and associate with persons’ in a City within which the latter is presumably free to move at will. And the court perceives no such grounds. But passing that, the point of present importance is the underscoring of the fact that our concern is with First Amendment activities.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Berrigan v. Sigler

3. “While there are differences between prisoners and parolees (or released persons like [plaintiff] ), there are none that diminish the protections enjoyed by the latter under the First Amendment. So the principles of the foregoing cases apply here.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Trisvan v. Annucci