McGuire v. Strange’s Empirical Analysis
2015
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · City of Oklahoma City v. Tuttle · Steffel v. Thompson · Weaver v. Graham · Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez
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.
“Sex offenders, due to the nature of their offenses, have a reduced expectation of privacy. In balancing the sex offender's rights, and the interest of public safety, the Legislature finds that releasing certain information to the public furthers the primary governmental interest of protecting vulnerable populations, particularly children. Employment and residence restrictions, together with monitoring and tracking, also further that interest. The Legislature declares that its intent in imposing certain registration, notification, monitoring, and tracking requirements on sex offenders is not to punish sex offenders but to protect the public and, most importantly, promote child safety.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Doe v. Marshall“Ala. Code § 15 -20A-5. It also applies to anyone convicted in another jurisdiction of a crime that,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Doe v. Marshall“there may be other constitutional concerns with requiring registrants to carry a branded license.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Doe v. Marshall
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.