Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 476 FSUPP 896 - Jackson v. Conway

Jackson v. Conway’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
June 2020
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently June 2020

7 federal appellate · 3 district ·

80197919801990200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000D · 42 U.S.C. § 2000D · 42 U.S.C. § 2000D

Relies on Warth v. Seldin · Baker v. Carr · Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp · Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. · United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP)

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

  1. “(2) A recipient, in determining the types of services ... or facilities which will be provided under any such program . or the situations in which, such services . or facilities will be provided under any such program, or the class of individuals to be afforded an opportunity to participate in any such program, may not . . . utilize criteria or methods of administration which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin, or have the effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the program as respect individuals of a particular race, color, or national origin.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) deny an individual any service, financial aid, or other benefit provided under the program; (ii) provide any service ... or other benefit to an individual which is different, or as provided in a different manner, from that provided to others under the program; (iii) subject an individual to segregation or separate treatment in any matter related to his receipt of any service ... or other benefit under the program; (iv) restrict the individual in any way in the enjoyment of any advantage or privilege enjoyed by others receiving any service . or other benefit under the program.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(3) In determining the site or location of a facility, an applicant or recipient may not make selections with the effect of excluding individuals from, denying them the benefits of, or subjecting them to discrimination under any programs to which this regulation applies, on the ground of race, color, or national origin; or with the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing the accomplishment of the objectives of the Act or this regulation.”
    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.