Dearth v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 34 district ·

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

1. “In a case of this sort, where the plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief, past injuries alone are insufficient to establish standing. Rather, [the plaintiff] must show he is suffering an ongoing injury or faces an immediate threat of injury.”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Frost v. Sioux City · Cal. Cattlemen's Ass'n v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv.

2. “must show [they are] suffering an ongoing injury or face[ ] an immediate threat of injury.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Frank LLP v. Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau · Ramirez v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement

3. “We agree with [plaintiff] that the Government has denied him the ability to purchase a firearm and he thereby suffers an ongoing injury. [Plaintiffs] injury is indeed like that of the plaintiff in Parker, who had standing to challenge the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns because he had been denied a registration certificate to own a handgun. As we there stated, a license or permit denial pursuant to a state or federal administrative scheme that can trench upon constitutionally protected interests gives rise to an Article III injury; the formal process of application and denial, however routine, suffices to show a cognizable injury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Kachalsky v. Cacace