Preterm, Inc. v. Dukakis’s Empirical Analysis
591 F.2d 121 · 1979
Citation profile
51 federal appellate · 15 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 119 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2024 · most notably Harris v. McRae (1980), New Hampshire Right to Life Political Action Committee v. Gardner (1996)
51 federal appellate · 15 district · 10 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 Caminetti v. United States · United States v. American Trucking Associations · Hagans v. Lavine · Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill · Morton v. Mancari
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 119 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * [N]one of the funds provided for in this [paragraph] shall be used to perform abortions except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term; or except for such medical procedures necessary for the victims of rape or incest, when such rape or incest has been reported promptly to a law enforcement agency or public health service; or except in those instances where severe and long-lasting physical health damage to the mother would result if the pregnancy were carried to term when so determined by two physicians.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““When a state singles out one particular medical condition — here, a medically complicated pregnancy — and restricts treatment for that condition to life and death situations it has, we believe, crossed the line between permissible discrimination based on degree of need and entered into forbidden discrimination based on medical condition. ****** “We find it ‘unreasonable’ and wholly ‘[inconsistent with the objectives of the Act’, 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(17), for a state to provide abortion services and then, with limited exceptions for victims of rape and incest, [6] deny it to all those who will not die without it. We know of no other instance where a legislative decision to pay for medical care is based on the distinction between life and death.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“(b) Each [medical] service must be sufficient in amount, duration, and scope to reasonably achieve its purpose. (c) The Medicaid agency may not arbitrarily deny or reduce the amount, duration, or scope of a required service ... to an otherwise eligible recipient solely because of the diagnosis, type of illness or condition. (d) The agency may place appropriate limits on a service based on such criteria as medical necessity or on utilization control procedures.”
4 later decisions 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.