Thomas v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Grayned v. City of Rockford · Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. · Kolender v. Lawson
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1. While in Lafayette Park, defendant may have in his possession only the following items of personal property, in addition to literature used in the course of his First Amendment activity: one raincoat, one umbrella, one coat, other clothing necessary for one person during one twenty-four hour period, a camera, a tape recorder, two blankets, one thermos, toilet articles, a supply of food no greater than that required for one person during one twenty-four hours period, and an amount of plastic necessary to cover these articles in inclement weather....; 2. While in Lafayette Park, defendant shall not have -in his possession a sleeping bag, tarpaulin, duffel bag, or any other item suitable for the storage of clothing or other personal belongings; 3. Defendant shall conform to the representations made by him in his demonstration permit application, completed December 21, 1987. Specifically, defendant shall “leave the Park area to wash, launder [his] clothes, prepare food, store personal property, and perform all ... biological bodily functions”; 4. Defendant shall remove himself from Lafayette Park for at least thirty-five (35) hours, not necessarily to run consecutively, during every seven-day period.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Over the course of their vigil, plaintiffs and federal law enforcement officials have engaged in an ongoing confrontation arising from plaintiffs’ exercise of First Amendment rights. It is undisputed that plaintiffs have been repeatedly warned, cited, arrested, and convicted for violating one or another of these regulations. Plaintiff Thomas alone has been tried for such infractions in this Court at least a dozen times since 1982.”
1 later decision 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.