332 F. Supp. 2d 376 - Van Arnam v. General Services Administration’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 3 district ·

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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “While the state has a legitimate interest in protecting itself from liability for injuries associated with the use of its property, ... [ajbsent a showing that those carefully-crafted remedies [marchers’ efforts to minimize the risk of injury or damage, waivers of claims against the state, and existing civil and criminal sanctions for trespassing, vandalism, etc.] are unavailing in this instance, the state may not insist upon broader restrictions which substantially infringe constitutional rights.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 980 F. Supp. 2d 1356 - iMatter Utah v. Njord

2. “The principal inquiry in determining content neutrality, in speech cases generally and in time, place, or manner cases in particular, is whether the government has adopted a regulation of speech because of disagreement with the message it conveys. The government’s purpose is the controlling consideration. A regulation that serves purposes unrelated to the content of expression is deemed neutral, even if it has an incidental effect on some speakers or messages but not others.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 980 F. Supp. 2d 1356 - iMatter Utah v. Njord