Commonwealth v. Gilbert’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““We examine these Acts only to determine the congressional plan. Looking to all of them in the aggregate, the conclusion'is infescápable-that Congress ■’ has intended'to occupy the field of sedition. Taken as á whole, they evince a ! congressional plan which makes it reasonable to determine that no room, has been left for the States to supplement it. Therefore, a state sedition statute .. is superseded regardless of whether it purports to supplement the federal law. ■ * * ; ? “ * * *'" the federal statutes ‘touch a field" in which the federal interest is -⅛0- dominant that the federal system (must) be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on'the same subject.’ * * * Congreás having thus treated seditious conduct as a matter of vital national concern, it is in 'ho sense a local enforcement problem. * * * “* * * enforcement of state sedition acts presents a serious danger of conflict with the administration of the federal program.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Braden v. Commonwealth