Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 741 F.3d 48 - Yellowbear v. Lampert

Yellowbear v. Lampert’s Empirical Analysis

741 F.3d 48 · 2014

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 2000B · 42 U.S.C. § 2000C

Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Wisconsin v. Yoder · Sherbert v. Verner · Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. L Smith · City of Boerne v. Flores

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

  1. “extend[ed to] the experience and expertise of prison administrators does not extend so far that prison officials may declare a compelling governmental interest by fiat.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “when (at the very least) the government (1) requires the plaintiff to participate in an activity prohibited by a sincerely held religious belief, (2) prevents the plaintiff. from participating in an activity motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, or (3) places considerable pressure on the plaintiff to violate a sincerely held religious belief — for example, by presenting an illusory or Hobson’s choice where the only realistically possible course of action available to the plaintiff trenches on sincere religious exercise.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “No government shall impose a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person residing in or confined to an institution, as defined in section 1997 of this title, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person— (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”
    1 later decision 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.