Farmers Educational and Cooperative Union of America North Dakota Division v. Wday Inc’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
100 federal appellate · 13 district · 49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 233 later decisions (33 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2019 · most notably New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission (1969)
100 federal appellate · 13 district · 49 state decisions — followed in 13 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 47 U.S.C. § 151 · 47 U.S.C. § 307 · 47 U.S.C. § 315 · 47 U.S.C. § 326
Relies on San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon · Bethlehem Steel Co. v. New York State Labor Relations Board · Hill v. State of Florida Watson · Radio Station WOW, Inc. v. Johnson · California v. Taylor
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 233 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) If any licensee shall permit any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office in the use of such broadcasting station: Provided, That such licensee shall have no power of censorship over the material broadcast under the provisions of this section. No obligation is imposed upon any licensee to allow the use of its station by any such candidate.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he term censorship, ... as commonly understood, connotes any examination of thought or expression in order to prevent publication of “objectionable” material. We find no clear expression of legislative intent, nor any other convincing reason to indicate Congress meant to give “censorship” a narrower meaning in § 315.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives”
3 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.