Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 505 U.S. 1 - Nordlinger v. Hahn

Nordlinger v. Hahn’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

2,151
cited by 2,151 later decisions
15
cited 15 times by the Supreme Court
42
states following
December 2025
most recently cited

441 federal appellate · 241 district · 782 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,151 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2025 · most notably Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, Inc. (1993), Heller v. Doe Ex Rel. Doe (1993)

441 federal appellate · 241 district · 782 state decisions — followed in 42 states

77501992200020102020decided

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 Perry v. Sindermann · Rakas v. Illinois · Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Allen v. Wright

Cited together with City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, Inc. · Heller v. Doe Ex Rel. Doe · Romer Governor of Colorado v. Evans · United States Railroad Retirement Board v. Fritz

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 2,151 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
    121 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “does not demand for purposes of rational-basis review that a legislature or governing decisionmaker actually articulate at any time the purpose or rationale supporting its classification”
    22 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We have no difficulty in ascertaining at least two rational or reasonable considerations of difference or policy that justify denying petitioner the benefits of her neighbor’s lower assessments. First, the State has a legitimate interest in local neighborhood preservation, continuity, and stability .... Second, the State legitimately can conclude that a new owner at the time of acquiring his property does not have the same reliance interest warranting protection against higher taxes as does an existing owner.”
    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.