Smith v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
424 F.2d 267 · 1970
Citation profile
17
cited by 17 later decisions
March 1977
most recently cited
15 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 50 U.S.C. § 3811
Relies on United States v. O'Brien · Bolling v. Sharpe · United States v. Seeger · United States v. Sisson · Goesaert v. Cleary
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“he claims a violation of the equal protection and due process clauses of the Constitution in that the Selective Service Act does not conscript men in the war industries which profit by war, and exempts men under I8V2 and over age 26. This issue has been answered against appellant’s contentions. Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 , 499, 74 S.Ct. 693 , 98 L.Ed. 884 (1954); Goesaert v. Cleary, 335 U.S. 464 , 69 S.Ct. 198 , 93 L.Ed. 163 (1948); Bertelsen v. Cooney, 213 F.2d 275 (5th Cir. 1954), cert. denied 348 U.S. 856 , 75 S.Ct. 81 , 99 L.Ed. 674 . The equal protection clause, as provided in the Fourteenth Amendment, or as implied in the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, merely requires that all legislative classifications have a reasonable basis and that everyone placed within a classification be treated similarly. Smith v. United States, 424 F.2d 267 , at 268-269 (9th Cir. 1970).”
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.