Shaw v. Barr’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1973 (§ 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) · 42 U.S.C. § 1973C (§ 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) · 42 U.S.C. § 1973L (§ 14 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Hishon v. King & Spalding · Neitzke v. Williams · Bell v. Hood
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[f]or the south-central to southeast area, there were several plans drawn providing for a second majority-minority congressional district”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shaw v. Reno“does not have the purpose and will not have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Shaw v. Reno“adopted with the purpose and effect of discriminating against white voters . . . on account of their race.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Shaw v. Reno
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.