Blum v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
744 F.3d 790 · 2014
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 13 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2261A · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 43 (Animal Enterprise Protection Act of 1992)
Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Warth v. Seldin · Baker v. Carr · Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce ...— (1) for the purpose of damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise; and (2) in connection with such purpose— (A) intentionally damages or causes the loss of any real or personal property (including animals or records) used by an animal enterprise...; (B) intentionally places a person in reasonable fear of the death of or serious bodily injury to that person ...; or (C) conspires or attempts to do so; shall be punished as provided for in subsection (b).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(A) the replacement costs of lost or damaged property or records, ... the loss of profits, or increased costs, ...; but (B) does not include any lawful economic disruption (including a lawful boycott) that results from lawful public, governmental, or .business reaction to the disclosure of information about an animal enterprise[.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Nothing in this section' shall be construed— (1) to prohibit any expressive conduct (including peaceful picketing or other peaceful demonstration) protected from legal prohibition by the First Amendment to the Constitution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.