Khalsa v. Weinberger’s Empirical Analysis
779 F.2d 1393 · 1985
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably Watkins v. United States Army (1989), Phillips v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. (2007)
24 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 502
Relies on Baker v. Carr · William Marbury v. James Madison · Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division · Chappell v. Wallace · Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The nature and strength of the plaintiff's claim; (2) The potential injury to the plaintiff if review is refused; (3) The extent of interference with military functions; and (4) The extent to which military discretion or expertise is involved.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]lmost any regulation may cause a particularly sensitive civilian to decide that he or she could not take the statutory enlistment oath to follow all orders.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Id. at ----, 106 S.Ct. at 1313-1314, quoting Warren, The Bill of Rights and the Military, 37 N.Y.U.L.Rev. 181, 187 (1962); see also Khalsa, 779 F.2d at 1395 n. 1. The Court also adopted an approach of”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Khalsa v. Weinberger
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.