Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
712 F.2d 650 · 1983
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 17 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Walsh v. Ford Motor Co. (1986), International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 474 v. National Labor Relations Board (1987)
35 federal appellate · 17 district · 2 state decisions
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 Udall v. Tallman · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc. · Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Chadha
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although Congress is free to permit the states to establish eligibility requirements for recipients of Title X funds, Congress has not delegated that power to the states. Title X does not provide, or suggest, that states are permitted to determine eligibility criteria for participants in Title X programs.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“reasonably able to conclude that the grant of authority contemplates the regulations issued,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is elementary that under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution states are not permitted to establish eligibility standards for federal assistance programs that conflict with the existing federal statutory or regulatory scheme. The only court to consider this issue [the validity of state parental notification and consent laws] in the context of Title X squarely concluded that West Virginia’s attempt to require parental consent as a condition to the provision of family planning services constituted the imposition of an additional eligibility requirement that clearly thwarted the goals of Title X. See Doe v. Pickett, 480 F.Supp. 1218, 1220-1221 (D.W.Va.1979). Since we have concluded that, even after the 1981 amendment, the continuing policies of Title X prohibit the Secretary from requiring parental notification, the states would likewise be precluded from imposing similar conditions.”
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.