Testa v. Katt’s Empirical Analysis
330 U.S. 386 · 1947
Citation profile
253 federal appellate · 67 district · 282 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 890 later decisions (86 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2026 · most notably Will v. Michigan Department of State Police (1989), Brown v. Allen (1953)
253 federal appellate · 67 district · 282 state decisions — followed in 32 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 Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad · Huntington v. Attrill · Ex parte Siebold · Martin Fairfax v. Hunter's
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 890 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he Constitution [of the United States] and the laws passed pursuant to it are the supreme laws of the land, binding alike upon states, courts, and the people, `any thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.' " [U.S. Const. Art. VI]. (Emphasis added.) The form of government reflected by the two New Jersey constitutional paragraphs in issue closely approximate the scheme envisioned by the New Jersey Constitution of 1776 which provided for a legislative council composed of one person from each county (Senate) and an assembly having three persons from each county (General Assembly). N.J. Const. 1776, Art. III. The right was reserved to said legislature, at any time or times thereafter "to add to or diminish the number or proportion of the members of the Assembly for any county or counties * * * on the principles of more equal representation, * * *.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The suggestion that the act of Congress is not in harmony with the policy of the state ... is quite inadmissible, because it presupposes what in legal contemplation does not exist. When Congress, in the exertion of the power confided to it by the Constitution, adopted that act, it spoke for all the people and all the states, and thereby established a policy for all. That policy is as much the policy of Connecticut as if the act had emanated from its own legislature, and should be respected accordingly in the courts of the State.””
3 later decisions 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.