Currier v. Potter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Even if the first factor were satisfied, we find that plaintiffs have failed to clear the second and third Cort v. Ash hurdles[.]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sprint Telephony PCS, L.P. v. County of San Diego · Sprint Telephony PCS, L.P. v. County of San Diego

2. “When a forum is nonpublic, we review government-imposed restrictions under a reasonableness standard. `The Government's decision to restrict access to a nonpublic forum need only be reasonable; it need not be the most reasonable or the only reasonable limitation.' [Citation.] But the government may not 'restrict speech in whatever way it likes.' [Citation.] Such restrictions cannot `be based on the speaker's viewpoint and must otherwise be reasonable in light of the purpose of the property.' [Citation.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 154 Cal. App. 4th 866 - San Leandro Teachers Ass'n v. Governing Bd.

3. “In addition to time, place, and manner regulations, the State may reserve the forum for its intended purposes, communicative or otherwise, as long as the regulation on speech is reasonable and not an effort to suppress expression merely because public officials oppose the speakers’s view. Such sparing treatment stems from the oft-recognized principle that the First Amendment does not guarantee access to property simply because it is owned or controlled by the government.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. James v. City & County of Honolulu