Dellums v. M Powell U S Nixon Subpoena to Compel Disclosure of Recorded Presidential Conversations’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably Dellums v. Powell (1977), Hayden v. National Security Agency/Central Security Service (1979)
9 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 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
Relies on United States v. Nixon · William Marbury v. James Madison · United States v. Reynolds · Ingraham v. Wright · Sullivan v. Murphy
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a formal claim of privilege based on the generalized interest of presidential confidentiality, without more, works an absolute bar to discovery of presidential conversations in civil litigation, regardless of the relevancy or necessity or the information sought.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'the detrimental effects of disclosure (must be weighed) against the necessity for production shown.' " 10 In addition, we affirmed the District Court's ruling that appellees had made a showing of need sufficient to overcome the claim of Presidential privilege: "(P)laintiffs-appellees have certainly made at least a 'preliminary showing of necessity' for information that is not merely 'demonstrably relevant' but indeed substantially material to their case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dellums v. Powell“that before any documents are disclosed in a public proceeding or record there would be due and ample notice to Mr. Nixon, and an opportunity to litigate the issue of need for public disclosure, on a determination to be made in the light of the actual litigating posture of the case and the contents of the document(s). Id. at 249 . Again, this only establishes that a properly limited restraining order may be obtained upon a proper showing of cause.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Halkin
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.