49 Ill. 2d 338 - The People v. McCabe’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 2 district · 227 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 256 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably 88 Ill. 2d 482 - People v. La Pointe (1982), 142 Ill. 2d 54 - Fumarolo v. Chicago Board of Education (1990)
17 federal appellate · 2 district · 227 state decisions — followed in 20 states
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 32 Ill. 2d 441 - The People v. Irwin · Commonwealth v. Leis · 21 Ill. 2d 572 - People Ex Rel. County of Du Page v. Smith · People v. Stark and Peacock · 11 Ill. 2d 579 - Thillens, Inc. v. Morey
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 256 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“". . . In determining whether a statutory classification violates the equal protection clause, we must begin with the presumption that the classification is valid and must impose the burden of showing invalidity on the party challenging the classification. The Equal Protection Clause does not deny the states the power to classify *Page 1198 in the exercise of their police power and it recognizes the existence of a broad latitude and discretion in classifying. If any state of facts may reasonably be conceived which would justify the classification, it must be upheld. The right of judicial questioning of a classification under the Equal Protection Clause is thus limited. . . . Whether the enactment . . . is the best means to achieve the desired results . . . is a matter for the judgment of the legislature, and the honest conflict of serious opinion does not suffice to bring them within the range of judicial cognizance." People v. McCabe , 49 Ill.2d 338 , 275 N.E.2d 407 (1971).”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Cocaine, which is placed with marijuana and the opiates in the Narcotic Drug Act, is a powerful stimulant, whereas the morphine-type drugs have a depressing action. Too, cocaine is further unlike the opiates in that it does not have effects of tolerance or physical dependence and abstention does not cause acute withdrawal symptoms. However, because of its potent nature, it 'induces intense physical and mental excitation and a marked reduction in normal inhibitions which often results in aggressive and even violent behavior. Intense hallucinations and paranoid delusions are common and, because of this, cocaine users frequently attempt to dilute the experience with a depressant such as heroin or morphine.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"In determining whether a statutory classification violates the equal-protection clause, we must begin with the presumption that the classification is valid and must impose the burden of showing invalidity on the party challenging the classification. [Citations.] The equal-protection clause does not deny the States the power to classify in the exercise of their police power and it recognizes the existence of a broad latitude and discretion in classifying. [Citation.] If any state of facts may reasonably be conceived which would justify the classification, it must be upheld [citation]. The right of judicial questioning of a classification under the equal-protection clause is thus limited. * * * But it is required that there be a reasonable basis for distinguishing the class to which the law is applicable from the class to which it is not. [Citation.] Appropriate respect should be given to the fact of a legislative classification, but there is a judicial obligation to insure that the power to classify has not been exercised arbitrarily and, if it has been, the legislation cannot be justified under the label of `classification.' [Citation.] It was observed recently: `[A] state may not, under the guise of classification, arbitrarily discriminate against one and in favor of another similarly situated.' Lake Shore Auto Parts Co. v. Korzen, 49 Ill.2d 137, 148 [ 273 N.E.2d 592 (1971) ]." McCabe, 49 Ill.2d at 340-41 , 275 N.E.2d 407 .”
2 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.