Alan McSurely and Margaret McSurely v. John J. McClellan’s Empirical Analysis
553 F.2d 1277 · 1976
Citation profile
42 federal appellate · 22 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2024 · most notably Nixon v. Fitzgerald (1982), Dellums v. Powell (1977)
42 federal appellate · 22 district ·
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 Scheuer v. Rhodes · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Paul v. Davis
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he acquisition of knowledge through informal sources is a necessary concomitant of legislative conduct and thus should be within the ambit of the privilege so that congressmen are able to discharge their constitutional duties properly.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'notwithstanding the [safekeeping] order of the United States District Court,' " and without the McSurelys' knowledge. Id. at 1288 (citation omitted). 9 We examined at length Ratliff's role in the alleged conspiracy and concluded that although only a trial would permit a conclusive determination of Ratliff's authority under the safekeeping order, it was a "fair certainty that plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case to the effect that the purpose of the 'safekeeping' order of the three-judge court was to preserve the seized items both for the McSurelys' benefit and for the orderly administration of the judicial process ... and that Brick's investigative activity ... violated [the] order.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The power to investigate and to do so through compulsory process plainly falls within [the sphere of legitimate legislative activity]. This Court has often noted that the power to investigate is inherent in the power to make laws because “[a] legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect or change.” ... To conclude that the power of inquiry is other than an integral part of the legislative process would be a miserly reading of the Speech or Debate Clause in derogation of the “integrity of the legislative process.””
1 later decision 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.