Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 477 U.S. 635 - Lyng v. Castillo

Lyng v. Castillo’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

434
cited by 434 later decisions
8
cited 8 times by the Supreme Court
18
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

126 federal appellate · 62 district · 86 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 434 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Rode v. Dellarciprete (1988), Bowen v. Gilliard (1987)

126 federal appellate · 62 district · 86 state decisions — followed in 18 states

162019861990200020102020decided

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 Goldberg v. Kelly · City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Dandridge v. Williams · San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez · Shapiro v. Thompson

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

  1. “The “household” definition does not order or prevent any group of persons from dining together. Indeed, in the overwhelming majority of cases it probably has no effect at all. It is exceedingly unlikely that close relatives would choose to live apart simply to increase their allotment of food stamps, for the cost of separate housing would almost certainly exceed the incremental value of the additional stamps.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “'directly and substantially' interfere[s] with family living arrangements and thereby burden[s] a fundamental right.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “they do not exhibit obvious, immutable, or distinguishing characteristics that define them as a discrete group”
    6 later decisions 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.