Buckley v. Meng’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The overriding issue as to use of school facilities for non-academic purposes is not raised. Thus, while there may be no duty to open the doors of the school houses for uses other than academic — and I have some doubt even as to this proposition— once they are opened they must be opened under conditions consistent with constitutional principle [s].” Plaintiffs in the instant case do not take issue with the power of the Board “to constitutionally limit the use of college facilities by forbidding all outside speakers to appear on campus and restrict campus facilities exclusively for use by immediate members of the university community.” Plaintiffs’ brief dated December 18, 1968, p. 21.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Gay Students Organization of the University of New Hampshire v. Bonner · 306 F. Supp. 963 - Stacy v. Williams

2. ““The state is under no duty to make school buildings available for public meetings. * * * If it elects to do so, however, it cannot arbitrarily prevent any members of the public from holding such meetings. ([N]or) * * * make the privilege of holding them dependent on conditions that would deprive any members of the public of their constitutional rights. A state is without power to impose an unconstitutional requirement as a condition for granting a privilege even though the privilege is the use of state property.” See also Buckley v. Meng, 35 Misc. 467 , 230 N.Y.S.2d 924 (1962).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Healy v. James

3. “Other programs offered by outside organizations insofar as they are determined to be compatible with the aims of Hunter College as a public institution of higher learning.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 315 F. Supp. 893 - American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, Inc. v. Radford College