United States v. Galloway’s Empirical Analysis
951 F.2d 64 · 1992
Citation profile
59 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently January 2020 · most notably United States v. Williams (1992), Johnson v. Rodriguez (1997)
59 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney · Brewster v. Derwinski · Delaware v. New York · Hallstrom v. Tillamook County · Hallstrom v. Tillamook County
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 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[d]iscriminatory purpose in an equal protection context implies that the decisionmaker selected a particular course of action at least in part because of, and not simply in spite of, the adverse impact it would have on an identifiable group.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[E]ven if a neutral law has a disproportionately adverse effect upon a racial minority, it is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause only if that impact can be traced to a discriminatory purpose.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Purposeful discrimination invokes the strictest scrutiny of adverse differential treatment. Absent such purpose, differential impact is subject to the test of rationality.”
2 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.