Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 746 F.2d 855 - International Union v. Donovan

International Union v. Donovan’s Empirical Analysis

746 F.2d 855 · 1984

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
September 2021
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 11 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2021 · most notably Lincoln v. Vigil (1993), Cherokee Nation of Okla. v. Leavitt (2005)

19 federal appellate · 11 district · 1 state decisions

17019841990200020102020decided

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 19 U.S.C. § 2293 · 19 U.S.C. § 2296 · 19 U.S.C. § 2311 · 26 U.S.C. § 51 · 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 28 U.S.C. § 292 · 5 U.S.C. § 701 · 5 U.S.C. § 703

Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · M. Steinthal & Co. v. Seamans · Train v. City of New York · State Highway Commission of Missouri v. Volpe · March 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A lump-sum appropriation leaves it to the recipient agency (as a matter of law, at least) to distribute the funds among some or all of the permissible objects as it sees fit”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “As the Supreme Court has said (in a case involving precisely the issue of Executive compliance with appropriation laws, although the principle is one of general applicability): “legislative intention, without more, is not legislation.” The issue here is not how Congress expected or intended the Secretary to behave, but how it required him to behave, through the only means by which it can (as far as the courts are concerned, at least) require anything — the enactment of legislation. Our focus, in other words, must be upon the text of the appropriation.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he distribution of public funds among competing social programs is an archetypically political task, involving the application of value judgments and predictions to innumerable alternatives”
    2 later decisions 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.