Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
894 federal appellate · 405 district · 466 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3,106 later decisions (88 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2025 · most notably Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. (1983), Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc. (1992)
894 federal appellate · 405 district · 466 state decisions — followed in 36 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
reviewedPacific Legal Foundation v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 16 U.S.C. § 824 (§ 201 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 16 U.S.C. § 824A · 42 U.S.C. § 2011 (Atomic Energy Act of 1954) · 42 U.S.C. § 2012 · 42 U.S.C. § 2013 · 42 U.S.C. § 2014 (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009) · 42 U.S.C. § 2018 · 42 U.S.C. § 2021
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · United States v. O'Brien · Bishop v. Wood · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Hines v. Davidowitz
Cited together with Hines v. Davidowitz · Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp. · Silkwood v. Corporation · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul
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 3,106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.”
202 later decisions quote this exact passage“the fitness of the issues for judicial decision”
28 later decisions quote this exact passage“[W]e accept California's avowed economic purpose as the rationale for enacting § 25524.2. Accordingly, the statute lies outside the occupied field of nuclear safety regulation.”
6 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.