City of Chicago v. Environmental Defense Fund’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
164 federal appellate · 41 district · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 488 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2025 · most notably Geier v. American Honda Motor Co. (2000), Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter, Communities for Great Ore. (1995)
164 federal appellate · 41 district · 40 state decisions — followed in 11 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedEnvironmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. City of Chicago (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co. · Keene Corp. v. United States · Murphy v. Sullivan · John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co Harris Trust and Savings Bank Sperry Master Retirement Trust No
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 488 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is generally presumed that Congress acts intentionally and purposely when it includes particular language in one section of a statute but omits it in another.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“it is the statute, and not [its legislative history], which is the authoritative expression of the law....”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“RCRA . . . empowers EPA to regulate hazardous wastes from cradle to grave.”
4 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.