Qwest Corporation v. City of Santa Fe New Mexico’s Empirical Analysis
380 F.3d 1258 · 2004
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 15 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably Chamber of Commerce of United States v. Edmondson (2010), Independent Living Center of Southern California, Inc. v. Shewry (2008)
29 federal appellate · 15 district · 3 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 Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams · Cannon v. University of Chicago · Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez · Gonzaga University v. Doe
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No State or local statute or regulation, or other State or local legal requirement, may prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the ability of any entity to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications service.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[n]othing in this section affects the authority of a State or local government to manage the public rights-of-way or to require fair and reasonable compensation from telecommunications providers, on a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory basis, for use of public rights-of-way on a nondiscriminatory basis, if the compensation required is publicly disclosed by such government.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A federal statutory right or right of action is not required where a party seeks to enjoin the enforcement of a regulation on the grounds that the local ordinance is preempted by federal law. A party may bring a claim under the Supremacy Clause that a local enactment is preempted even if the federal law at issue does not create a private right of action.”
2 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.