Rusk v. Cort’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
280 federal appellate · 50 district · 29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 602 later decisions (37 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2024 · most notably Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe (1971), Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner (1967)
280 federal appellate · 50 district · 29 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from District of Columbia District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Trop v. Dulles · Flemming v. Nestor · Ng Fung Ho v. White · Shaughnessy v. Pedreiro · United States v. Ju Toy
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 602 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in the absence of clear and convincing evidence that Congress so intended”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) Proceedings for declaration of United States nationality. If any person who is within the United States claims a right or privilege as a national of the United States and is denied such right or privilege by any department or independent agency, or official thereof, upon the ground that he is not a national of the United States, such person may institute an action under the provisions of section 2201 of title 28, United States Code [28 USCS § 2201], against the head of such department or independent agency for a judgment declaring him to be a national of the United States,____ An action under this subsection may be instituted only within five years after the final administrative denial of such right or privilege____”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[M]ake application to a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in the foreign country in which he is residing for a certificate of identity for the purpose of traveling to a port of entry in the United States and applying for admission. Upon proof to the satisfaction of such diplomatic or consular officer that such application is made in good faith and has a substantial basis, he shall issue to such person a certificate of identity.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Hinojosa v. Horn · Hogan v. Kerry
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.