Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 430 U.S. 99 - Califano v. Sanders

Califano v. Sanders’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

8,000
cited by 8,000 later decisions
60
cited 60 times by the Supreme Court
30
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

2,377 federal appellate · 1,593 district · 218 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8,000 later decisions (60 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States (1977), Patterson v. McLean Credit Union (1989)

2,377 federal appellate · 1,593 district · 218 state decisions — followed in 30 states

2.1k0197719801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedSanders v. Weinberger (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331

Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Weinberger v. Salfi

Cited together with Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Weinberger v. Salfi · Mathews v. Eldridge · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Johnson v. Robison

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 8,000 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “cannot be read to authorize judicial review of alleged abuses of agency discretion in refusing to reopen claims for social security benefits.”
    74 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “step of foreclosing jurisdiction unless Congress' intent to do so is manifested by”
    59 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action within the meaning of a relevant statute, is entitled to judicial review thereof.”
    55 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.