Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 389 U.S. 347 - Katz v. United States

Katz v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

23,275
cited by 23,275 later decisions
431
cited 431 times by the Supreme Court
50
states following
June 2026
most recently cited

5,627 federal appellate · 1,317 district · 11,979 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23,275 later decisions (431 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Terry v. Ohio (1968), Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982)

5,627 federal appellate · 1,317 district · 11,979 state decisions — followed in 50 states

5.0k01967197019801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedKatz v. United States (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Brinegar v. United States

Cited together with Terry v. Ohio · Rakas v. Illinois · Jones v. United States · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Chimel v. California

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 23,275 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
    1,150 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““When one man speaks to another he takes all the risks ordinarily inherent in so doing, including the risk that the man to whom he speaks will make public what he has heard. * * * It is but a logical and reasonable extension of this principle that a man take the risk that his hearer, free to memorize what he hears for later verbatim repetition, is instead recording it or transmitting it to another.””
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “Whether safeguards other than prior authorization by a magistrate would satisfy the Fourth Amendment in a situation involving the national security is a question not presented by this case.”
    8 later decisions 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.