96 F. Supp. 2d 720 - Millsaps v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 2 U.S.C. § 1 · 2 U.S.C. § 7 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 3 U.S.C. § 1 (Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Hines v. Davidowitz · Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul · United States v. Classic · Silkwood v. Corporation · Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Communications Commission
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Congress has surely been aware of absentee voting, and has taken no action to curb it. This makes it clear that Congress never intended that the states cannot hold an election for federal officials unless all ballots are cast on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Martha L. Millsaps“present[] no obstacle to accomplishing the goals of the federal election day statutes. Tennessee's effort to increase voter participation does not conflict with, and is therefore not preempted by, the federal laws designating federal election day.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Martha L. Millsaps“[w]e hold today only that if an election does take place, it may not be consummated prior to federal election day.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Martha L. Millsaps
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.