United States v. Public Utilities Commission’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
438 federal appellate · 33 district · 61 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 789 later decisions (57 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Offutt v. United States (1954), United Steelworkers of America v. Weber (1979)
438 federal appellate · 33 district · 61 state decisions — followed in 14 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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 717 · 15 U.S.C. § 79 (Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935) · 16 U.S.C. § 791A (§ 321 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 18 U.S.C. § 1761 · 21 U.S.C. § 25 · 27 U.S.C. § 121 (Wilson Act) · 27 U.S.C. § 122 (Webb-Kenyon Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1257
Relies on United States v. American Trucking Associations · Feres v. United States · Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co. · Texas Pacific Railway Company v. Abilene Cotton Oil Company · Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan
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 789 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When we decide from legislative history, including statements of witnesses at hearings, what Congress probably had in mind, we must put ourselves in the place of a majority of Congressmen and act according to the impression we think this history should have made on them. Never having been a Congressman, I am handicapped in that weird endeavor. That process seems to me not interpretation of a statute but creation of a statute.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“literal words would bring about an end completely at variance with the purpose of the statute”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Part II is a direct result of Attleboro. They are to be read together. The latter left no power in the states to regulate licensees' sales for resale in interstate commerce, while the former established federal jurisdiction over such sales. Discussion of the constitutional problem as reflected in that statute and the Natural Gas Act in recent cases support this conclusion. Especially in the litigation arising under the Gas Act has this Court expressed the view that the limitations established on Commission jurisdiction therein were designed to coordinate precisely with those constitutionally imposed on the states. Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co., 320 U.S. 591 , 609-610 [64 S.Ct. 281, 291, 88 L.Ed. 333]; Panhandle [Eastern] Pipe Line Co. v. Public Service Commission, 332 U.S. 507 , 514-515 [68 S.Ct. 190, 193-194, 92 L.Ed. 128]; Interstate Natural Gas Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 331 U.S. 682 , 690-691 [67 S.Ct. 1482, 1487, 91 L. Ed. 1742]; Illinois Natural Gas Co. v. [Central Illinois] Public Service Co., 314 U.S. 498 , 506 [62 S.Ct. 384, 387, 86 L.Ed. 371].”
6 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.