Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 627 F.2d 772 - Charles v. Carey

Charles v. Carey’s Empirical Analysis

627 F.2d 772 · 1980

Citation profile

104
cited by 104 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
July 2017
most recently cited

51 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 104 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2017 · most notably Diamond v. Charles (1986), Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986)

51 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

9001980199020002010decided

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 Warth v. Seldin · Roe v. Wade · Singleton v. Wulff · Harris v. McRae · Eisenstadt v. Baird

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

  1. “'[A]pplication of an improper legal standard in determining the likelihood of success on the merits.... [or] misapplication of the law to particular facts is an abuse of discretion.'”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[Tjhe term “undue burden” defines the ultimate constitutional issue, not merely the threshold requirement for strict scrutiny. When describing specifically the burden of the party challenging a state regulation, the Supreme Court has not used the term “undue” .... The threshold question whether there is a “burden” or “direct interference” in the pregnancy termination decision requires the plaintiff merely to show the requisite degree of interference. If the interference is sufficiently substantial and not de minimis, the State has to show the compelling basis for the law, that is, that the burden is not “undue” or unjustifiable.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “to act as the mouthpiece for the State's theory of life.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.