Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 84 Idaho 254 - Caesar v. Williams

Caesar v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
March 1990
most recently cited

1 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1990

1 district · 14 state decisions

1101962197019801990decided

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

Relies on Baker v. Carr · McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Gomillion v. Lightfoot · Colegrove v. Green · MacDougall v. Green

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

  1. “`It is fundamental that the judicial power to declare legislative action invalid upon constitutional grounds is to be exercised only in clear cases... .' [citation] Petition of Mountain States Telephone & Tel. Co., 76 Idaho 474, 480 , 284 P.2d 681, 683 . "`In the case of statutes passed by the legislative assembly and assailed as unconstitutional the question is not whether it is possible to condemn, but whether it is possible to uphold; and we stand committed to the rule that a statute will not be declared unconstitutional unless its nullity is placed, in our judgment, beyond reasonable doubt.... [citations]' Keenan v. Price, 68 Idaho 423, 433 , 195 P.2d 662, 667 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “" Political power inherent in the people. — All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform or abolish the same whenever they may deem it necessary; and no special privileges or immunities shall ever be granted that may not be altered, revoked, or repealed by the legislature." [Idaho Constitution, Art. I, § 2.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"Until such time as the legislature has had ample opportunity to fully examine the impact of the 1960 Census on the apportionment of representatives throughout this State, in the light of Idaho Const. Art. III, §§ 2, 4 and 5, we cannot say that the 1951 Act is unconstitutional as having failed to grant representative rights of the citizenry of this State afforded by the Constitution." [ 371 P.2d at 249 .]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.