Lomack’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al. · Washington v. Davis · City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co. · Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education · Keyes v. School District No 1 Denver Colorado
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 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“). 21 In sum, we conclude that the benefits of diversity, as set forth by the City, are not a compelling interest that justifies its diversity policy. 3. Compliance With the 1980 Consent Decree 22 The City also argues that compliance with the 1980 Consent Decree constitutes a compelling interest. This, too, is unavailing. Compliance with a consent decree may certainly be a compelling interest, see Citizens Concerned About Our Children v. Sch. Bd. of Broward County, Florida, 193 F.3d 1285, 1292-94 (11th Cir. 1999) (explaining that violation of a consent decree”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“).) As explained above, however, we simply cannot conclude that, individually or in the aggregate, these interests are compelling. 9 III. CONCLUSION 27 We conclude this opinion as we began, by reiterating what this case is not about. It is not about remedying intentional discrimination in the Newark Fire Department. It is not about improving the Department's ability to extinguish fires. It is not about whether diverse work places are good for employees or for society or whether long-range hiring goals are being met. This case is about whether Newark can”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Newark, N.J. General Ordinances v. I, tit. II, ch. 21, § 1.2 (2005). Accordingly, Grutter 's holding regarding a compelling interest in the educational benefits of diversity is unavailing here. And, we note, the City does not argue that diversity within individual fire companies is in any other way necessary, or even beneficial, to the Fire Department's mission of fighting fires, i.e., that the Department has an operational need for diverse fire companies, 8 and we do not read the City's assertions of increased”
1 later decision 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.