Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 413 F.3d 45 - Joo v. Japan

Joo v. Japan’s Empirical Analysis

413 F.3d 45 · 2005

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
June 2019
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 9 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Younger v. Harris · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Baker v. Carr · Schlesinger v. Reservists Committee to Stop the War · Ruhrgas Ag v. Marathon Oil Co.

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

  1. “serious implications for stability in the region.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “exercising jurisdiction over particular petitioners in connection with their alleged conduct, that opinion might well be entitled to deference as the considered judgment of the Executive on a particular question of foreign policy.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “... [1] a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue.to a coordinate political department; or [2] a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving [the issue]; or [3] the impossibility of deciding the issue without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion; or [4] the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government; or [5] an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made; or [6] the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.