Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 91 U.S. 275 - Welton v. The State of Missouri

Welton v. The State of Missouri’s Empirical Analysis

91 U.S. 275 · 1875

Citation profile

696
cited by 696 later decisions
153
cited 153 times by the Supreme Court
42
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 51 district · 204 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 696 later decisions (153 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Caminetti v. United States (1917), Mugler v. State of Kansas State of Kansas Tufts (1887)

31 federal appellate · 51 district · 204 state decisions — followed in 42 states

1110187518801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Gibbons v. Ogden · Samuel Thurlow v. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Case of the State Freight Tax Reading Railroad Company v. Pennsylvania · Crandall v. State of Nevada

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

  1. “(Harvester Co. v. Department of Treasury, 322 U. S. 340 . 88 L. Ed. 1319 .) “The veryobject of investing this power (Commerce clause) in the general government was to insure this uniformity against discriminating state legislation.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““A law which requires a license to be taken out by peddlers who sell articles not produced in the state, and requires no such license with respect to those who sell in the same way articles which are produced in the state; is in conflict with the power of Congress to' regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several states.””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “comprehends intercourse for the purposes of trade in any and all its forms, including the transportation, purchase, sale, and exchange of commodities between the citizens of our country and the citizens or subject of other countries, and between the citizens of different States”). 7 . This is not to say that non-commercial activities are beyond the reach of the Commerce Clause, but merely that they are not interstate commerce per se and cannot be regulated directly as”
    4 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.