Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 339 U.S. 707 - United States v. Texas

United States v. Texas’s Empirical Analysis

339 U.S. 707 · 1950

Citation profile

250
cited by 250 later decisions
45
cited 45 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

93 federal appellate · 29 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 250 later decisions (45 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Gulf Offshore Company v. Mobil Oil Corporation (1981), State of Alabama v. State of Texas State of Rhode Island (1954)

93 federal appellate · 29 district · 26 state decisions

4801950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Shively v. Bowlby · United States v. California · United States v. Belmont · John Pollard et al. v. John Hagan et al. · Knight v. United Land Ass'n

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

  1. “[0]nce low-water mark is passed the international domain is reached. Property rights must then be so subordinated to political rights as in substance to coalesce and unite in the national sovereign. Today the controversy is over oil. Tomorrow it may be over some other substance or mineral or perhaps the bed of the ocean itself. If the property, whatever it may be, lies seaward of low-water mark, its use, disposition, management, and control involve national interests and national responsibilities. That is the source of national rights in it.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"... to deny to the states admitted subsequent to the formation of the Union, ownership of this property would deny them admission on an equal footing with the original States, since the original States did not grant these properties to the United States, but reserved them to themselves." United States v. Texas, supra, p. 716, 70 S.Ct. p. 922.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"(North Dakota) ... shall be deemed admitted by congress into the union on an equal footing with the original states." The Enabling Act, Chapter 180, 25 U. S. Statutes at Large, 676 Sec. 7.”
    2 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.