Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 410 U.S. 752 - Rosario v. Rockefeller

Rosario v. Rockefeller’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

938
cited by 938 later decisions
79
cited 79 times by the Supreme Court
29
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

315 federal appellate · 91 district · 148 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 938 later decisions (79 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Buckley v. Valeo (1976), Sosna v. Iowa (1975)

315 federal appellate · 91 district · 148 state decisions — followed in 29 states

3090197319801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedRosario v. Rockefeller (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Baker v. Carr · Reynolds v. Sims · Shapiro v. Thompson · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Yick Wo v. Hopkins

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

  1. “voters in sympathy with one party designate themselves as voters of another party so as to influence or determine the results of the other party's primary.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Democratic Party of United States v. Wisconsin Ex Rel. La Follette · Van Allen v. Cuomo
  2. “capable of repetition, yet evading review.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
    e.g. Democratic Party of United States v. Wisconsin Ex Rel. La Follette · Jones v. Womacks
  3. “(1) is the limitation so severe as itself to constitute an unconstitutionally onerous burden; (2) is the limitation unconnected to any important state goal; and (3) is there no less drastic means to effectuate the state goal.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Michaelson Ex Rel. Lewis v. Booth · 499 F. Supp. 121 - Anderson v. Celebrezze

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.