Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 781 F.2d 573 - Stephen L. Ustrak, Cross-Appellant v. James W. Fairman, Cross-Appellee

Stephen L. Ustrak, Cross-Appellant v. James W. Fairman, Cross-Appellee’s Empirical Analysis

781 F.2d 573 · 1986

Citation profile

126
cited by 126 later decisions
4
states following
February 2024
most recently cited

59 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 126 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably Benson v. Allphin (1986), Ustrak v. Fairman (1988)

59 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

49019861990200020102020decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Carey v. Piphus · Procunier v. Martinez · Parker v. Levy · Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners' Labor Union, 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 126 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[T]he concepts of “overbreadth” and “vagueness” in the jurisprudence of the First Amendment were devised in order to prevent the slightest discouragement of free speech, and therefore have only limited relevance to a sphere where the right of free speech is limited. People who want to enjoy the full panoply of constitutional rights to express themselves had best refrain from committing crimes punishable by imprisonment.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “no presumption of discrimination can be based on the mere fact that a white is passed over in favor of a black.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he Supreme Court has held that the concepts of vagueness and overbreadth have less scope when applied to the regulation of the free speech of soldiers than when applied in the civilian sphere, because of the special needs of military discipline. [Citations omitted.] The same is true with respect to communication within prisons.”
    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.