Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 468 F.2d 883 - Mahlon D. Green v. James B. McKeon

Mahlon D. Green v. James B. McKeon’s Empirical Analysis

468 F.2d 883 · 1972

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
11
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Kenneth R. Mancuso v. James L. Taft, Mayor (1973), 173 W. Va. 526 - White v. Manchin (1984)

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 14 state decisions — followed in 11 states

26019721980199020002010decided

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

Relies on Shapiro v. Thompson · Dunn v. Blumstein · Bullock v. Carter · Shoup Voting Machine Corp. v. Datamedia Computer Service, Inc. · King v. New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority

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

  1. “"The durational residency requirement at issue classifies Plymouth residents on the basis of recent travel. That classification alone requires that the requirement be strictly scrutinized because it operates to penalize the exercise of the basic constitutional right to travel. Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, 338 , 92 S.Ct. 995 , 31 L.Ed. 2d 274 (1972). It is not material that the classification denies new residents something that is not a constitutional right, i.e., the right to become a candidate for public office.” 468 F2d at 884.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"Further, in our representative form of government, the voters are the arbiters of the suitability of candidates for public office. Whether a candidate has the ability to carry out the duties of a particular city office, even though he arrived in Plymouth less than two years prior to election day, is a matter for consideration by the voters in choosing between candidates running for that office. Opposing candidates undoubtedly will bring this deficiency, if it is one, to the attention of the electorate in the course of campaigning.” 468 F2d at 885.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““We emphasize, as did the court in Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330 , 92 S.Ct. 995 , 31 L.Ed.2d 274 (1972), that the provision at issue is a durational residency requirement. Plymouth is not precluded from requiring its officials to be bona fide residents, as determined by appropriately defined and uniformly applied standards. However, the city may not require that candidates for city office must have been bona fide residents for two years prior to election day.” (Emphasis in original text) Id. at 885.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.