Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 459 U.S. 197 - Federal Election Commission v. National Right to Work Committee

Federal Election Commission v. National Right to Work Committee’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

399
cited by 399 later decisions
31
cited 31 times by the Supreme Court
14
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

145 federal appellate · 66 district · 46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 399 later decisions (31 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2024 · most notably McConnell United States Senator et al. v. Federal Election Commission et al. (2003), United States v. National Treasury Employees Union (1995)

145 federal appellate · 66 district · 46 state decisions — followed in 14 states

146019821990200020102020decided

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

reviewedNational Right to Work Committee, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Buckley v. Valeo · Broadrick v. Oklahoma · Grayned v. City of Rockford · Connally v. General Construction Co. · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button

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

  1. “second-guess a legislative determination as to the need for prophylactic measures where corruption is the evil feared.”
    22 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “directly implicate the integrity of our electoral process”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “to ensure that substantial aggregations of wealth amassed by the substantial advantages which go with the corporate form of organization should be converted into political “war chests” which could be used to incur political debts from legislators who are aided by the contributions ____ The second purpose ... is to protect the individuals who have paid money into a corporation or union for purposes other than the support of candidates from having that money used to supprt political candidates to whom they may be opposed. (Citations omitted.)”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.