Bauer v. Shepard’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 state decisions

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

1. “more respectful of our judicial colleagues in Indiana, to assume that they will act sensibly and resolve the open questions in a way that honors candidates' rights under the first amendment. When a statute is accompanied by [a] system that can flesh out details, the due process clause permits those details to be left to that system.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Trs. of Ind. Univ. v. Curry · Carrigan v. Nev. Comm'n on Ethics

2. “Plaintiffs want us to deem the law vague by identifying situations in which state officials might take an untenably broad reading of the [language], and then predicting that they will do so. It is far preferable, however, and more respectful of our judicial colleagues in Indiana, to assume that they will act sensibly and resolve the open questions in a way that honors candidates' rights under the first amendment. When a statute is accompanied by [a] system that can flesh out details, the due process clause permits those details to be left to that system. Parts of the Hatch Act are every bit as vague as the [language here], but in [ Civil Service Commission v. Letter Carriers , 413 U.S. 548 [ 93 S.Ct. 2880 , 37 L.Ed.2d 796 ] (1973) ] the Court held that problems of implementation could be tackled by administrative adjudication. 413 U.S. at 580 [ 93 S.Ct. 2880 ]. Similarly, in Parker v. Levy , 417 U.S. 733 [ 94 S.Ct. 2547 , 41 L.Ed.2d 439 ] (1974), the Court held that an article of the Uniform Code of Military Justice making it a court-martial offense to engage in "conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman" is not unconstitutionally vague, because military tribunals have elaborated on what is "unbecoming" for an officer and made it more specific than the unadorned words. The National Labor Relations Act is full of vague terms [such as "unfair labor practice"], and the National Labor Relations Board has yet to make all of them concrete, but no one supposes that the whole Act”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Trs. of Ind. Univ. v. Curry

3. “No public employee is entitled to do any particular task; a state may select the employee who can best do the job.... [A] state may decide to assign each case to a judge whose impartiality is not in question.... States are entitled to protect litigants by assigning impartial judges before the fact, as well as by removing partial judges afterward.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Kemp