Helms v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
621 F.2d 211 · 1980
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1073 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Morissette v. United States · Shapiro v. Thompson · Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia · Shelton v. Tucker · Carafas v. J
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We therefore find no sufficiently compelling state interest here which permits distinguishing between nonsupporting parents within or without the State of Georgia. There is no question that the statute violates equal protection. Further, even where a governmental purpose is legitimate, as here, the 'purpose cannot be pursued by means that broadly stifle fundamental personal liberties when the end can be more narrowly achieved.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jones v. Helms“[a] series of noncriminal acts can thus become a crime under the statute.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jones v. Helms
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.