Davis v. Guam’s Empirical Analysis
785 F.3d 1311 · 2015
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1971 (Civil Rights Act of 1957) · 48 U.S.C. § 1421B · 52 U.S.C. § 10101 · 52 U.S.C. § 10310
Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Batson v. Kentucky · Warth v. Seldin · Allen v. Wright · City of Los Angeles v. Lyons
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“). Relying on the uncertain timing of the plebiscite, the district court initially dismissed the case for lack of standing and ripeness. Id . at . We reversed that dismissal on appeal, holding that Davis's alleged unequal treatment was a sufficient injury to establish standing and that his claim was ripe because he adequately alleged that he was "currently being denied equal treatment under Guam law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davis v. Guam“any election in which public issues are decided or public officials selected.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Davis v. Guam
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.