Williams v. Osser’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 1994
2 district · 4 state decisions
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 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1971 (Civil Rights Act of 1957) · 42 U.S.C. § 1973A (§ 3 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965)
Relies on Reynolds v. Sims · Dunn v. Blumstein · Williams v. Rhodes · Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections Butts · Bullock v. Carter
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.
“The principal state interest which the statute protects is the prevention of fraudulent voting. Maintaining voter rolls that include persons who no longer reside in a precinct, or who reside there but do not vote, conduces to fraud____ ... Preventing fraud and maintaining up-to-date, reliable registration lists is necessary to preserve the effectiveness of votes legitimately cast and outweighs the minimal burden on the individual’s exercise of the franchise.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hoffman v. Maryland“[t]he burden [of re-registration under the non-voting purge law] does not nearly approach the requirements of initial registration.”
1 later decision 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.