Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 U.S. 145 - Reynolds v. States

Reynolds v. States’s Empirical Analysis

98 U.S. 145 · 1878

Citation profile

2,342
cited by 2,342 later decisions
189
cited 189 times by the Supreme Court
50
states following
October 2025
most recently cited

683 federal appellate · 146 district · 904 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,342 later decisions (189 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2025 · most notably Crawford v. Washington (2004), Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. (1982)

683 federal appellate · 146 district · 904 state decisions — followed in 50 states

34301878188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 The American Insurance Company v. 356 Bales of Cotton David Canter · Clinton v. Englebrecht · Benner v. Porter · Hornbuckle v. Toombs

Cited together with Cantwell v. State of Connecticut · Irvin v. Dowd · Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Sherbert v. Verner · Wisconsin v. Yoder

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 2,342 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[T]he manner of the juror while testifying is oftentimes more indicative of the real character of his opinion than his words. That is seen below, but cannot always be spread upon the record. Care should, therefore, be taken in the reviewing court not to reverse the ruling below upon such a question of fact, except in a clear case.”
    58 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Laws are made for the ■ government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices.... Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief "superior to the law of the land, and in effect to perrhit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances.”
    51 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The Constitution gives the accused the right to a trial at which he should be confronted with the witnesses against him; but if a witness is absent by his own wrongful procurement, he cannot complain if competent evidence is admitted to supply the place of that which he has kept away. The Constitution does not guarantee an accused person against the legitimate consequences of his own wrongful acts. It grants him the privilege of being confronted with the witnesses against him; but if he voluntarily keeps the witnesses away, he cannot insist on his privilege. If, therefore, when absent by his procurement, their evidence is supplied in some lawful way, he is in no condition to assert that his constitutional rights have been violated.”
    35 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.