Department of Commerce v. New York’s Empirical Analysis
588 U.S. 752 · 2019
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 161 later decisions (14 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably 140 S. Ct. 1891 - Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (2020), FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (2024)
7 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 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
Applies 13 U.S.C. § 141 · 13 U.S.C. § 195 · 13 U.S.C. § 5 · 13 U.S.C. § 6 · 2 U.S.C. § 2A · 5 U.S.C. § 701 · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Schmerber v. State of California · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.
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 161 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Reading [the particular statutory provision] to mean what the District Court thought would turn it into the proverbial elephant stuffed into a mouse hole. [The provision], however, is a decidedly mouse-like provision. It was enacted with no fanfare and no real explanation . . . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“To have standing, a plaintiff must 'present an injury that is concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent; fairly traceable to the defendant's challenged behavior; and likely to be redressed by a favorable ruling.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“entirely fail[ing] to consider an important aspect of the problem [or] offer[ing] an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before [it].”
2 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.