Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
555 federal appellate · 175 district · 243 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,663 later decisions (87 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2025 · most notably Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent (1984), Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission (1994)
555 federal appellate · 175 district · 243 state decisions — followed in 30 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
reviewedthe decision below (from District of Columbia District Court)
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1461 · 28 U.S.C. § 1252 · 39 U.S.C. § 3001 (Deceptive Mail Prevention and Enforcement Act) · 39 U.S.C. § 3008 · 39 U.S.C. § 401
Relies on New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. · Griswold v. State of Connecticut · Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District · Miller v. California
Cited together with Central Hudson Gas Electric Corporation v. Public Service Commission of New York · Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc. · Board of Trustees of State Univ. of NY v. Fox · Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn. · Edenfield v. Fane
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 1,663 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“no more than propose a commercial transaction.”
101 later decisions quote this exact passage“At the outset, we must determine whether the expression is protected by the First Amendment. For commercial speech to come within that provision, it at least must concern lawful activity and not be misleading. Next, we ask whether the asserted governmental interest is substantial. If both inquiries yield positive answers, we must determine whether the regulation directly advances the governmental interest asserted, and whether it is not more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest.”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[t]he party seeking to uphold a restriction on commercial speech carries the burden of justifying it.”
6 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.