Carey v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
619 federal appellate · 194 district · 380 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,950 later decisions (120 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2025 · most notably Connick v. Myers (1983), Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989)
619 federal appellate · 194 district · 380 state decisions — followed in 32 states
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
reviewedBrown v. Scott (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Payton v. New York · Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. · Broadrick v. Oklahoma · Grayned v. City of Rockford
Cited together with Perry Education Ass'n v. Perry Local Educators' Ass'n · Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley · Ward v. Rock Against Racism · Frisby v. Schultz · Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent
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 1,950 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“has always rested on the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values.”
35 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The State's interest in protecting the well-being, tranquility, and privacy of the home is certainly of the highest order in a free and civilized society.”
21 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[W]e have often declared that “[a] state or municipality may protect individual privacy by enacting reasonable time, place, and manner regulations applicable to all speech irrespective of content.” (citations omitted). In sum, “no mandate in our Constitution leaves States and governmental units powerless to pass laws to protect the public from the kind of boisterous and threatening conduct that disturbs the tranquility of spots selected by the people * * * for homes, wherein they can escape the hurly-burly of the outside business and political world * * *.” (citation omitted). Preserving the sanctity of the home, the one retreat to which men and women can repair to escape from the tribulations of their daily pursuits, is surely an important value. Our decisions reflect no lack of solicitude for the right of an individual “to be let alone” in the privacy of the home, “sometimes the last citadel of the tired, the weary, and the sick.” (citations omitted). The State’s interest in protecting the well-being, tranquility, and privacy of the home is certainly of the highest order in a free and civilized society.””
19 later decisions 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.