Paige v. Cisneros’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. “When the design of a Government program suggests that Congress has provided what it considers adequate remedial mechanisms for constitutional violations that may occur in the course of its administration, we have not created additional Bivens remedies.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bagola v. Kindt · Richards v. Kiernan

2. “Since Paige could not appeal to the MSPB, the district court thought it appropriate to order the creation of a parallel administrative apparatus through which he could challenge his termination. This action was unwarranted because it failed to accord respect to the administrative system established by statute for reviewing federal personnel actions. A statute providing for review of some claims but not others means that the “others” (like Paige’s) don’t receive review; it does not mean that judges should disregard the exclusions and order the agency to provide a comparable administrative review anyway.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Association of Administrative Law Judges v. Colvin

3. “We do not think it necessary to choose between these lines of authority [over whether the Reform Act 'affect[s] the general grant of federal-question jurisdiction in 28 U.S.C. § 1331'] because Paige lacks the sort of substantial constitutional claim that activates the rule requiring doubts to be resolved in favor of judicial review.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Tiltti v. Weise