Monitor Patriot Co. v. Roy’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
177 federal appellate · 50 district · 417 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 949 later decisions (99 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Buckley v. Valeo (1976), Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974)
177 federal appellate · 50 district · 417 state decisions — followed in 41 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
Relies on New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Cantwell v. State of Connecticut · Roth v. United States · St. Amant v. Thompson · Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts
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 949 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“has its fullest and most urgent application precisely to the conduct of campaigns for political office.”
43 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“concern. And the candidate who vaunts his spotless record and sterling integrity cannot convincingly cry”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The respondent argues that under New York Times a plaintiff has a special burden of proof only as to libels `relating to official conduct,' that for a candidate `official conduct' means `conduct relevant to fitness for office,' and that the public-private issue is one of fact for the jury. In our view, however, the syllogistic manipulation of distinctions between `private sectors' and `public sectors,' or matters of fact and matters of law, is of little utility in resolving questions of First Amendment protection. "In Garrison v. Louisiana, [ 379 U.S. 64 [ 85 S.Ct. 209 , 13 L.Ed.2d 125 ] (1964)] ... [t]his Court rejected the proposed distinction: `Of course, any criticism of the manner in which a public official performs his duties will tend to affect his private, as well as his public, reputation. The New York Times rule is not rendered inapplicable merely because an official's private reputation, as well as his public reputation, is harmed. The public official rule protects the paramount public interest in a free flow of information to the people concerning public officials, their servants. To this end, anything which might touch on an official's fitness for office is relevant. Few personal attributes are more germane to fitness for office than dishonesty, malfeasance, or improper motivation, even though these characteristics may also affect the official's private character.' 379 U.S., at 76-77 , 85 S.Ct. at 216-217 ... . ..... "We therefore hold as a matter of constitutio”
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.