Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 964 F.2d 865 - Lightfoot v. Eu

Lightfoot v. Eu’s Empirical Analysis

964 F.2d 865 · 1992

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
July 2025
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2025 · most notably California Democratic Party v. Jones (2000), Gottlieb v. Federal Election Commission (1998)

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

1701992200020102020decided

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 Anderson v. Celebrezze · Storer v. Brown · Burdick v. Takushi · Jenness v. Fortson · Kruso v. International Telephone & Telegraph 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It is too plain for argument . . . that the State . . . may insist that intraparty competition be settled before the general election by primary election or by party convention.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. California Democratic Party v. Jones · The Cool Moose Party et al. v. State of Rhode Island et al.
  2. “The Progressives believed democracy should be something greater than competition between political parties.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
    e.g. O'CALLAGHAN v. State · Steel v. Jones
  3. “The person who receives the highest number of votes at a primary election as the candidate of a political party for nomination to an office is the nominee of that party at the ensuing general election.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Steel v. Jones

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.