Arnett v. Kennedy’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
1,451 federal appellate · 535 district · 1,048 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4,628 later decisions (134 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2026 · most notably Mathews v. Eldridge (1976), Wolff v. McDonnell (1974)
1,451 federal appellate · 535 district · 1,048 state decisions — followed in 49 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. A case is still cited after being overruled — to note the reversal, distinguish it, or in dissent. 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 Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Morrissey v. Brewer · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
Cited together with Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Perry v. Sindermann · Mathews v. Eldridge · Goldberg v. Kelly · Bishop v. Wood
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 4,628 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Government, as an employer, must have wide discretion and control over the management of its personnel and internal affairs. This includes the prerogative to remove employees whose conduct hinders efficient operation and to do so with dispatch. Prolonged retention of a disruptive or otherwise unsatisfactory employee can adversely affect discipline and morale in the work place, foster disharmony, and ultimately impair the efficiency of an office or agency.”
250 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Mathews v. Eldridge · Paul v. Davis“such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service”
21 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Cornelius v. Nutt · Rampey v. Allen“(a) An individual in the competitive service may be removed or suspended without pay only for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service.”
4 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.