Missouri v. Jenkins’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
221 federal appellate · 33 district · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 598 later decisions (17 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2025 · most notably 132 S. Ct. 1309 - Martinez v. Ryan (2012), Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007)
221 federal appellate · 33 district · 47 state decisions — followed in 13 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
reviewedJenkins ex rel. Agyei v. Missouri (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Edelman v. Jordan · United States v. Mendenhall · Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al.
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 598 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Just as demographic changes independent of de jure segregation will affect the racial composition of student assignments [citations omitted] so too will numerous external factors beyond the control of the KCMSD and the State affect minority student achievement. So long as these external factors are not the result of segregation, they do not figure into the remedial calculus. [Citations omitted.] Insistence upon academic goals unrelated to the effects of legal segregation unwarrantably postpones the day when the KCMSD will be able to operate on its own.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“local autonomy of school districts is a vital national tradition.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[1] whether there has been full and satisfactory compliance with the decree in those aspects of the system where supervision is to be withdrawn; [2] whether retention of judicial control is necessary or practicable to achieve compliance with the decree in other facets of the school system; and [3] whether the school district has demonstrated, to the public and to the parents and students of the once disfavored race, its good-faith commitment to the whole of the courts’ decree and to those provisions of the law and the Constitution that were the predicate for judicial intervention in the first instance. 26”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.