Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission v. Federal Communications Commission’s Empirical Analysis
513 F.2d 1142 · 1975
Citation profile
91 federal appellate · 11 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 157 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably City of Davis v. Coleman (1975), City of Rochester v. Bond (1979)
91 federal appellate · 11 district · 6 state decisions
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 16 U.S.C. § 825S · 28 U.S.C. § 2342 · 28 U.S.C. § 2344 · 42 U.S.C. § 4321 (§ 2 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (§ 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 47 U.S.C. § 151 · 47 U.S.C. § 154 · 47 U.S.C. § 214
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation Same · Flast v. Cohen · Sierra Club v. Morton
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 157 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Regulatory practices and policies that will serve the 'public interest' today may be quite different from those that were adequate to that purpose in 1910, 1927, or 1934, or that may further the public interest in the future.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wold Communications, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission · National Association of Broadcasters v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, National Citizens Committee for Broadcasting, Western Union Telegraph Company, Forward Communications Corporation, Graphic Scanning Corporation, United States Satellite Broadcasting Company, Inc., Direct Broadcast Satellite Corporation, Satellite Television Corporation, Satellite Syndicated Systems, Inc., Aerospace and Flight Test Coordinating Council, Manufacturers Radio Frequency Advisory Committee, Cbs, Inc., National Black Media Coalition, Association of Maximum Service Telecasters, Inc., California Public Safety Radio Association, Inc., Rca American Communications, Inc., Intervenors. National Association of Broadcasters v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Satellite Television Corporation, National Citizens Committee for Broadcasting, Satellite Syndicated Systems, Inc., Forward Communications Corporation, U.S. Satellite Broadcasting Co., Televisa, S.A., National Black Media Coalition, Cbs, Inc., Intervenors. County of Los Angeles v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Satellite Television Corporation, Intervenor“a general policy in favor of the entry of new carriers in the specialized communications field would serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(S)tatutory language does not suggest that the Commission is to give controlling weight to the mere fact that existing common carriers have the ability to perform the service the applicant wishes to furnish.”
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.