Grant v. Meyer’s Empirical Analysis
828 F.2d 1446 · 1987
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2025 · most notably Meyer v. Grant (1988), Kansas Judicial Review v. Stout (2008)
3 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Younger v. Harris · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Buckley v. Valeo · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Steffel v. Thompson
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The First Amendment is a value-free provision whose protection is not dependent on ‘the truth, popularity, or social utility of the ideas and beliefs which are offered.’ ... ‘The very purpose of the First Amendment is to foreclose public authority from assuming a guardianship of the public mind____ In this field every person must be his own watchman for truth, because the forefathers did not trust any government to separate the true from the false for us.’ ...””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““the effect of the statute’s absolute ban on compensation of solicitors is clear. It impedes the sponsors’ opportunity to disseminate their views to the public It curtails the discussion of issues that normally accompanies the circulation of initiative petitions. And it shrinks the size of the audience that can be reached.... In short, like the campaign expen diture limitations struck down- in Buckley , the Colorado statute imposes a direct restriction which ‘necessarily reduces the quantity of expression.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Meyer v. Grant · State v. Brookins“First, the duration of the challenged action must be too short for completion of litigation prior to its cessation or expiration. Second, there must be a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party will be subjected to the same action again.”
2 later decisions 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.