Blackhawk v. Pennsylvania’s Empirical Analysis
381 F.3d 202 · 2004
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably McTernan v. City of York (2009), McTernan v. City of York (2009)
13 federal appellate · 3 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 Anderson v. Creighton · Malley v. Briggs · Duncan v. Walker · SAUCIER v. KATZ Et Al. · Sherbert v. Verner
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A law fails the general applicability requirement if it burdens a category of religiously motivated conduct but exempts or does not reach a substantial category of conduct that is not religiously motivated and that undermines the purposes of the law to at least the same degree as the covered conduct that is religiously motivated.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We are not presented here with a neutral and generally applicable user fee that is uniformly imposed without allowing individualized exemptions.... Here, by contrast, we are confronted with a scheme that features both individualized and categorical secular exemptions and it is these that trigger strict scrutiny.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.