Daniel v. Waters’s Empirical Analysis
515 F.2d 485 · 1975
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently February 2017
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 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 28 U.S.C. § 1253 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281
Relies on National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Lemon v. Kurtzman · Dombrowski v. Pfister · Thornhill v. Alabama · Wisconsin v. Constantineau
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) “. . . [T]he provisions of the Tennessee statute are obviously in violation of the first Amendment prohibition on any law ‘respecting the establishment of-religion’ as that phrase has been authoritatively interpreted in Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 [ 89 S.Ct. 266 , 21 L.Ed.2d 228 ] (1968), and Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 [ 91 S.Ct. 2105 , 29 L.Ed.2d 745 ] (1971);” (2) “. . . [T]he exclusion at the end of Section 1 of the statute would inextricably involve the State Textbook Commission in the most difficult and hotly disputed Chief Justice Burger’s third standard [set out in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 612-613 [ 91 S.Ct. 2105 ] (1971)]. Throughout human history the God of some men has frequently been regarded as the Devil incarnate by men of other religious persuasions. It would be utterly impossible for the Textbook Commission to determine which religious theories were ‘occult’ or ‘satanical’ without seeking to resolve the theologians through the ages. “The requirement that some religious concepts of creation, adhered to presumably by some Tennessee citizens, be excluded on such grounds in favor of the Bible of the Jews and the Christians represents still another method of preferential treatment of particular faiths by state law and, of course, is forbidden by the establishment Clause of the First Amendment.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Steele v. Waters““Abstention is an appropriate response to a federal complaint alleging unconstitutionality of a state statute where state interpretation of its own ambiguous statute might serve to render it inoffensive to the federal Constitution.” (Emphasis supplied.) Daniel v. Waters, 515 F.2d 485, 488 (6th Cir. 1975).”
1 later decision 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.