Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 452 F.2d 315 - Carter v. Gallagher

Carter v. Gallagher’s Empirical Analysis

452 F.2d 315 · 1971

Citation profile

313
cited by 313 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
9
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

180 federal appellate · 28 district · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 313 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States (1977), Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)

180 federal appellate · 28 district · 20 state decisions

250019711980199020002010decided

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.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Monroe v. Pape · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education · Strauder v. West Virginia

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

  1. ““. . . the Act does not command that any person be hired simply because he was formerly the subject of discrimination, or because he is a member of a minority group. Discriminatory preference for any group, minority or majority, is precisely and only what Congress has proscribed."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““It has now been established by the Supreme Court that the use of mathematical ratios as ‘a starting point in the process of shaping a remedy’ is not unconstitutional and is ‘within the equitable remedial discretion of the District Court.’ Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1, 25 , 91 S.Ct. 1267, 1280 , 28 L.Ed.2d 554 (1971).””
    3 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.