Guttman v. Khalsa’s Empirical Analysis
669 F.3d 1101 · 2012
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 29 U.S.C. § 794A · 42 U.S.C. § 12101 (§ 2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12132 (§ 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12182 (§ 302 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12202 (§ 502 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000B
Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Mathews v. Eldridge · Morrissey v. Brewer · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the nature of the constitutional right at issue; (2) the extent to which Congress's remedial statute was passed in response to a documented history of relevant constitutional violations; and (3) whether the congressional statute is "congruent and proportional" to the specific class of violations at issue, given the nature of the relevant constitutional right and the identified history of violations.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'(1) which aspects of the State's alleged conduct violated Title II; (2) to what extent such misconduct also violated the Fourteenth Amendment; and (3) insofar as such misconduct violated Title II but did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment, whether Congress's purported abrogation of sovereign immunity as to that class of conduct is nevertheless valid.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]f the plaintiff is not alleging a constitutional violation and the case does not involve a type of discrimination or a right receiving heightened scrutiny, the state can be sued only if Congress found pervasive unconstitutional state conduct.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.