Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 829 FSUPP2D 504 - Justice v. Hosemann

Justice v. Hosemann’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
November 2014
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 2 U.S.C. § 434 (§ 304 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971)

Relies on Buckley v. Valeo · Elrod v. Burns · Reynolds v. Sims · First National Bank of Boston v. X Bellotti · Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

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

  1. “Voters act as legislators in the ballot-measure context, and interest groups and individuals advocating a measure’s defeat or passage act as lobbyists; both groups aim at pressuring the public to pass or defeat legislation. We think Californians, as lawmakers, have an interest in knowing who is lobbying for their vote, just as members of Congress may require lobbyists to disclose who is paying for the lobbyists’ services and how much.”
    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.