Wise v. Lipscomb’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
140 federal appellate · 24 district · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 579 later decisions (33 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably City of Mobile v. Bolden (1980), Growe v. Emison (1993)
140 federal appellate · 24 district · 28 state decisions
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
reviewedLipscomb v. Wise (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1973C (§ 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965)
Relies on Reynolds v. Sims · United States v. New York Telephone Co. · White v. Regester · Whitcomb v. Chavis · Burns v. Richardson
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 579 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a federal court declares an existing apportionment scheme unconstitutional, it is ... appropriate, whenever practicable, to afford a reasonable opportunity for the legislature to meet constitutional requirements by adopting a substitute measure rather than for the federal court to devise and order into effect its own plan.”
23 later decisions quote this exact passage“a legislative task which the federal courts should make every effort not to preempt.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Wright v. Sumter Cnty. Bd. of Elections · Billy N. Cook, Robert Carter, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Resident Citizens and Qualified Electors of Madison County, Mississippi, Plaintiffs v. Pat H. Luckett, Jr., Dorothy L. Dowdle, J.S. Harris, Jr., A.E. Crawford and E.D. Mansell, in Their Official Capacities as Duly Elected Supervisors of Madison County, Mississippi, Canton Branch, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Don Lane, George Elliott, Willie Harrell, Alive Scott and Roy Davis, in Their Official Capacities as Election Commissioners of Madison County, Mississippi“Legislative reapportionment is primarily a matter for legislative consideration and determination, ... for a state legislature is the institution that is by far the best situated to identify and then reconcile traditional state policies within the constitutionally mandated framework of substantial population equality. Where a legislature has failed to reconcile these conflicting state and federal goals, a federal court is left with the unwelcome obligation of performing in the legislature’s stead, while lacking the political authoritativeness that the legislature can bring to the task. In such circumstances, the court’s task is inevitably an exposed and sensitive one that must be accomplished circumspectly and in a manner ‘free from any taint of arbitrariness or discrimination. ’”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.