Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 825 F.2d 853 - United States v. Jackson

United States v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

825 F.2d 853 · 1987

Citation profile

83
cited by 83 later decisions
6
states following
May 2024
most recently cited

54 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably United States v. Cardenas (1993), United States v. Bengivenga (1988)

54 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

25019871990200020102020decided

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 8 U.S.C. § 1225 (§ 235 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1324A (§ 274a of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1357 (§ 287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Terry v. Ohio · United States v. Leon · Carroll v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Delaware v. Prouse

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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “reasonable certainty that the traffic passing through the checkpoint is international in character”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “intercept[s] no more than a negligible number of domestic travelers”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “Along much of the Mexican-United States border runs the Rio Grande River, which, in spite of a name indicating contrary magnificence, can be driven across, waded across, and easily [swam] across at all times, and much of the time can be walked across without wetting a foot. With so much access to a highway parallel to the border by aliens who could easily have walked across the border, we think the Fourth Amendment rule of reason would permit a search for those aliens of vehicles that may have taken them aboard after their arrival by other means within our boundaries.... [T]he impracticality of guarding every part where human crossing could be made should be so apparent as to make inexorably reasonable some method of curtailing illegal entry such as established at the Sierra Blanca checkpoint. 15”
    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.