Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 403 U.S. 388 - Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

23,267
cited by 23,267 later decisions
349
cited 349 times by the Supreme Court
50
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

6,535 federal appellate · 3,235 district · 769 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23,267 later decisions (349 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2026 · most notably Ashcroft v. Iqbal (2009), Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York (1978)

6,535 federal appellate · 3,235 district · 769 state decisions — followed in 50 states

6.4k0197119801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedBivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Katz v. United States · United States v. Wade

Cited together with Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Butz v. Economou · Davis v. Passman · Carlson v. Green · Bell v. Hood

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 23,267 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “special factors counselling hesitation in the absence of affirmative action by Congress.”
    114 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a particular remedial mechanism normally available in the federal courts,”
    39 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.”
    36 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.