Barnett v. Rodgers’s Empirical Analysis
410 F.2d 995 · 1969
Citation profile
54 federal appellate · 9 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 101 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2000 · most notably Procunier v. Martinez (1974), O'Lone v. Estate of Shabazz (1987)
54 federal appellate · 9 district · 4 state decisions
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 Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al. · Cantwell v. State of Connecticut · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Sherbert v. Verner · West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
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 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“feasible from the standpoint of prison management.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Kahane v. Carlson · Burns v. Long““That penal as well as judicial authorities respond to constitutional duties is vastly important to society as well as the prisoner. Treatment that degrades the inmate, invades his privacy, and frustrates the ability to choose pursuits through which he can manifest himself and gain self-respect erodes the very foundations upon which he can prepare for a socially useful life. Religion in prison subserves the rehabilitative function by providing an area within which the inmate may reclaim his dignity and reassert his individuality. * * * [Footnotes omitted]””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““the mere fact that government, as a practical matter, stands a better chance of justifying a curtailment of fundamental liberties where prisoners are involved does not eliminate the need for reasons imperatively justifying the particular retraction of rights challenged at bar.” Barnett v. Rodgers, 133 U.S.App.D.C. 296 , 302, 410 F.2d 995, 1001 (1969) (footnote 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.