Kramer v. Union Free School District No. 15’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
407 federal appellate · 211 district · 685 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 2,014 later decisions (130 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York (1978), Roe v. Wade (1973)
407 federal appellate · 211 district · 685 state decisions — followed in 42 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.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1253 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281
Relies on Reynolds v. Sims · McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Shapiro v. Thompson · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. State of Alabama Patterson · Williams v. Rhodes
Cited together with Reynolds v. Sims · Cipriano v. City of Houma · Dunn v. Blumstein · Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections Butts · Shapiro v. Thompson
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 2,014 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“necessary to promote a compelling state interest.”
70 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether the disfranchisement of all persons who have been convicted of crime violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Mississippi's registration statutes, previously noted, may be viewed as a valid procedural scheme designed to insure that all qualified citizens vote in the election precincts in which they reside. As conceded, the state has a legitimate interest in requiring some cutoff date for the registration of its voters. Our only inquiry is whether a cutoff time of four months, when measured by the tasks to be performed by the election officials, is arbitrary and unreasonable. Our duty is not to judge the state's requirement in terms of whether it is wise or desirable, but whether `any state of facts reasonably may be conceived to justify it.' That Mississippi's registration deadline may be the longest of any state in the Union, and twice as long as any other state, is neither controlling nor persuasive since the Constitution does not require uniformity among the states in the exercise of the state's power to set reasonable, general voter qualifications."”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.