New Mexico Department of Human Services v. Department of Health & Human Services Health Care Financing Administration’s Empirical Analysis
4 F.3d 882 · 1993
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1316 (§ 1116 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1396A (§ 1902 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo · New York State Department of Social Services v. Dublino · Mansell v. Mansell · Poe v. Seaborn
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“designed to afford medical assistance to persons whose income and resources are insufficient to meet the financial demands of necessary care and services.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Insofar as marriage is within temporal control, the States lay on the guiding hand. The whole subject of the domestic relations of husband and wife, parent and child, belongs to the laws of the States and not to the laws of the United States. Federal courts repeatedly have declined to assert jurisdiction over divorces that presented no federal question. On the rare occasion when state family law has come into conflict with a federal statute, this Court has limited review under the Supremacy Clause to a determination whether Congress has positively required by direct enactment that state law be pre-empted. A mere conflict in words is not sufficient. State family and family-property law must do major damage to clear and substantial federal interests before the Supremacy Clause will demand that state law be overridden. [Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo, 439 U.S. 572, 581 , 99 S.Ct. 802, 808 , 59 L.Ed.2d 1, 10-11 (1979) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).]”
1 later decision 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.