Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 538 F.3d 608 - Baude v. Heath

Baude v. Heath’s Empirical Analysis

538 F.3d 608 · 2008

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
3
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently November 2024

9 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

210200820102020decided

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 Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc. · Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co. · Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party · Exxon Corporation v. Governor of Maryland Shell Oil Company · Crawford v. Marion County Election Board

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

  1. “"Any balancing approach, of which Pike is an example, requires evidence. It is impossible to tell whether a burden on interstate commerce is clearly excessive in relation to the putative local benefits without understanding the magnitude of both burdens and benefits. Exact figures are not essential (no more than estimates may be possible) and the evidence need not be in the record if it is subject to judicial notice, but it takes more than lawyers' talk to condemn a statute under Pike . "”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “clearly excessive in relation to the putative local benefits”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Indiana thinks that in-person verification with photo ID helps to reduce cheating on legal rules, for both buying wine and voting (and perhaps other subjects). After the Supreme Court held in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, [553] U.S. [181], 128 S.Ct. 1610 , 170 L.Ed.2d 574 (2008), that a belief that in-person verification with photo ID reduces vote fraud has enough support to withstand a challenge under the first amendment, it would be awfully hard to take judicial notice that in-person verification with photo ID has no effect on wine fraud and therefore flunks the interstate commerce clause.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.