Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 547 U.S. 573 - Hill v. McDonough

Hill v. McDonough’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

630
cited by 630 later decisions
29
cited 29 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

312 federal appellate · 34 district · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 630 later decisions (29 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Jones v. Bock (2007), Nken v. Holder (2009)

312 federal appellate · 34 district · 40 state decisions

3510200620102020decided

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

reviewedHill v. McDonough (from Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988

Relies on Heck v. Humphrey · Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A. · Preiser v. Rodriguez · Barefoot v. Estelle · Gonzalez v. Crosby

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

  1. “[A] stay of execution is an equitable remedy. It is not available as a matter of right, and equity must be sensitive to the State's strong interest in enforcing its criminal judgments without undue interference from the federal courts.”
    15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a strong equitable presumption against the grant of a stay where a claim could have been brought at such a time as to allow consideration of the merits without requiring entry of a stay.”
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “inmates seeking time to challenge the manner in which the State plans to execute them must satisfy all of the requirements for a stay, including a showing of a significant possibility of success on the merits.”
    10 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.