WRIGHT Et Al. v. ROCKEFELLER, GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK, Et Al.’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
137 federal appellate · 43 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 487 later decisions (65 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2022 · most notably Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. (1977), Washington v. Davis (1976)
137 federal appellate · 43 district · 26 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
Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al. · Brown v. Allen · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. State of Alabama Patterson · Hirabayashi v. United States
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 487 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When racial or religious lines are drawn by the State, the multiracial, multireligious communities that our Constitution seeks to weld together as one become separatist; antagonisms that relate to race or to religion rather than to political issues are generated; communities seek not the best representative but the best racial or religious partisan. Since that system is at war with the democratic ideal, it should find no footing here.”
19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“As the majority below pointed out, the concentration of colored and Puerto Rican voters in one area in the county made it difficult, even assuming it to be permissible, to fix districts so as to have anything like an equal division of these voters among the districts. Undoubtedly some of these voters, as shown by this lawsuit, would prefer a more even distribution of minority groups among the four congressional districts, but others, like the intervenors in this case, would argue strenuously that the kind of districts for which appellants contended would be undesirable and, because based on race or place of origin, would themselves be unconstitutional.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
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.