United States v. Libby’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
8 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 1503 · 18 U.S.C. § 1623 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 508 · 28 U.S.C. § 509 (Justice Department Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Enhancement Act of 1988) · 28 U.S.C. § 510 · 28 U.S.C. § 515
Relies on Buckley v. Valeo · Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States · Lamie v. United States Trustee · Go-Bart Importing Co. v. United States · Morrison v. Olson
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Attorney General shall supervise all litigation to which the United States, an agency, or officer thereof is a party.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In reaching [its] conclusion [that the independent counsel was an inferior officer], [the Morrison Court] relied on several factors: that the independent counsel was subject to removal by a higher officer (the Attorney General), that she performed only limited duties, that her jurisdiction was narrow, and that her tenure was limited.... [The][p]etitioners are quite correct that the last two of these conclusions do not hold with regard to the office of military judge at issue here.... However, Morrison did not purport to set forth a definitive test for whether an office is “inferior” under the Appointments Clause. To the contrary, it explicitly stated: “We need not attempt here to decide exactly where the line falls between the two types of officers, because in our view [the independent counsel] clearly falls on the ‘inferior officer’ side of that line.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law; but the Congress may vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
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.