United States v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
282 federal appellate · 109 district · 255 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,011 later decisions (64 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2022 · most notably Landgraf v. USI Film Products (1994), Powell v. McCormack (1969)
282 federal appellate · 109 district · 255 state decisions — followed in 31 states
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
reviewedBrown v. United States (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on William Marbury v. James Madison · Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez · Trop v. Dulles · Flemming v. Nestor · Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer
Cited together with Nixon v. Administrator of General Services · United States v. Lovett · Selective Service System v. Minnesota Public Interest Research Group · Flemming v. Nestor · Cummings v. The State of Missouri
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 1,011 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply — trial by legislature.”
21 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[l]egislative acts, no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial are bills of attainder prohibited by the Constitution.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Baxley · Young v. State“was obviously not instituted with the idea that it would promote governmental efficiency. It was, on the contrary, looked to as a bulwark against tyranny. For if governmental power is fractionalized, if a given policy can be implemented only by a combination of legislative enactment, judicial application, and executive implementation, no man or group of men will be able to impose its unchecked will. 65 The separation of powers inquiry is not so much a review of theoretical abstractions of”
9 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.