Nos. 91-1005, 91-1019’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 12 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2018 · most notably Williams v. Lara (2001), Committee to Save the Rio Hondo v. Lucero (1996)
5 federal appellate · 12 district · 2 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
Relies on Warth v. Seldin · Baker v. Carr · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Allen v. Wright · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) its members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right; (b) the interests it seeks to protect are germane to the organization's purpose; and (c) neither the claim asserted nor the relief requested requires the participation of individual members in the lawsuit.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]oth parties mistakenly rely on Flast to resolve whether appellants qualify for taxpayer standing in this case. Flast does not directly govern this appeal because it applies to federal taxpayer standing issues, not questions relating to standing for state taxpayers.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Flast and Bowen are extremely limited holdings. They hold that federal taxpayers have standing to raise establishment clause claims against exercises of congressional power under the taxing and spending power of article I, section 8 of the constitution.”
1 later decision 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.