468 F. Supp. 2d 33 - King v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Conley v. Gibson · Colautti v. Franklin · Don Stenberg Attorney General of Nebraskas v. Leroy Carhart · Holcomb v. Powell
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discriminate against any of his employees . . . because he has opposed any practice made an unlawful employment practice by this subchapter.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. King v. Jackson“[n]umerical goal setting where there [was] a manifest imbalance or conspicuous absence of minorities and women in the agency's work force.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. King v. Jackson“HUD's failure to have an affirmative employment plan in place would violate Title VII,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. King v. Jackson
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.