Staebler v. Carter’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently November 2021
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
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 2 U.S.C. § 431 (§ 301 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971) · 2 U.S.C. § 437C (§ 306 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971) · 5 U.S.C. § 5503
Relies on Buckley v. Valeo · Udall v. Tallman · Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization · Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority · Crowell v. Benson
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“If that interpretation is correct, the President would be prohibited from making a recess appointment when a term of office has expired, as long as someone with a permissive claim to the office is still serving. The Court is not persuaded that this was the intention of the framers of the Constitution. There is nothing to suggest that the Recess Appointments Clause was designed as some sort of extraordinary and lesser method of appointment, to be used only in cases of extreme necessity. Some constitutional provisions, such as the First Amendment, have a preferred standing, but otherwise all parts of the Constitution are of equal validity and weight and should be construed in light of the principle that the entire Constitution must be regarded as one whole. Prout v. Starr, 188 U.S. 537, 543-4 , 23 S.Ct. 398 [400-401], 47 L.Ed. 584 (1903). The framers did not indicate that the appointment process was to be an exception to this general rule of equality, and no court has so held. 27 In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, it is therefore not appropriate to assume that this Clause has a species of subordinate standing in the constitutional scheme or that it is not as operative when Congress is not in session as the Nomination and Confirmation Clause (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2) is when Congress is available. * * * * * * There is thus no evidence, semantic, historic, philosophic, or in prior practice or usage, to support plaintiff’s view that the recess appointme”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“The Committee’s amendment would increase the probability that if there is a majority vote for injury, there would be a majority finding on a remedy. The Committee’s amendment would: ... (5) Provide that a commissioner whose term has expired may continue in office until his successor has been nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.... In the past, there has often been a delay between the time of the expiration of a commissioner’s term and the taking of office of his successor. Because any such periods of delay would leave the Commission without an odd number of commissioners and, therefore, without a tie-breaker, the Committee’s amendment would continue in office the Commissioner whose term has expired until his successor is confirmed by the Senate and takes office.”
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.