Americanos v. Carter’s Empirical Analysis
74 F.3d 138 · 1996
Citation profile
23 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably Barbara Sheridan v. Ei Dupont De Nemours and Company Jacques Amblard (1996), Thompson v. Illinois Department of Professional Regulation (2002)
23 federal appellate ·
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
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 630 (§ 11 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Elrod v. Burns · Branti v. Finkel · Batson v. Kentucky · Halas v. Department of Energy · Mobil Alaska Pipeline Co. v. United States
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“any person elected to public office in any State or political subdivision of any State by the qualified voters thereof, any person chosen by such officer to be on such officer’s personal staff, or an appointee on the policymaking level or an immediate ad-visor with respect to the exercise of the constitutional or legal powers of the office.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'meaningful input into governmental decisionmaking on issues where there is room for principled disagreement on goals or their implementation.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'whether the position held by the individual authorizes, either directly or indirectly, meaningful input into governmental decisionmaking on issues where there is room for principled disagreement on goals or their implementation.'”
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.