Joyner v. Mofford’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate · 2 district · 10 state decisions

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

1. “From the beginning of the Republic, commentators have asserted that the three qualifications contained in the Clause— age, citizenship, and residency — are exclusive, and that neither Congress nor the states may require more of a candidate. See, e.g., 1 J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 453-63 (5th ed. 1891). In Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 , 89 S.Ct. 1944 , 23 L.Ed.2d 491 (1969), the Supreme Court accepted this restrictive view of the Qualifications Clause — at least.as applied to Congress — and held that members of Congress may not set extra-constitutional qualifications for taking a seat in the House of Representatives. In addition, as the district court observed in the present case, the same principle has frequently been applied to state laws imposing additional qualifications on candidates for federal office. [Joyner v. Mofford] 539 F.Supp. [1120] at 1121-22 & n. 1 [ (D.C.Ariz.1982) ].”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. U. S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton · Thorsted v. Gregoire

2. “In its constitutional dimension, standing imports justiciability: whether the plaintiff has made out a “case or controversy” between himself and the defendant within the meaning of Art. III. This is the threshold question in every federal case, determining the power of the court to entertain the suit. As an aspect of justiciability, the standing question is whether the plaintiff has “alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy” as to warrant his invocation of federal-court jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court’s remedial powers on his behalf.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 613 F. Supp. 558 - Public Agencies Opposed to Social Security Entrapment v. Heckler · Emi Limited v. Bennett H

3. ““[ejxcept during the final year of the term being served, no incumbent of a salaried elective office, whether holding by election or appointment may offer himself for nomination to election to any salaried local, state or federal office,””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Laos v. Arnold · Fasi v. Cayetano