green
Positive treatment
2.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1975
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
(2×)
In 1971, following an expensive 1968 presidential election, the Congress enacted FECA, which relied upon public disclosure of campaign contributions [8] and expenditures [9] as the primary method of identifying and weeding out political quid pro quos. [10] See 1971 Provisions §§ 301-311; see also ACLU v. Jennings, 366 F.Supp. 1041 , 1054 nn. 18-20 (D.D.C.1973) (three-judge court) (describing FECA's Title III, which "established] an elaborate system of record keeping and public disclosure of campaign contributions and expenditures"), vacated as moot sub nom., Stoats v. ACLU, 422 U.S. 1030 , 9…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Aclu of Nj v. Nj Elec. Law Enf. Com'n
See also American Civil Liberties Union v. Jennings, 366 F.Supp. 1041 (D.D.C.1973), vacated as moot, 422 U.S. 1030 , 95 S.Ct. 2646 , 45 L.Ed.2d 686 (1975).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
American Civil Liberties Union v. New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission
See also American Civil Liberties Union v. Jennings, 366 F.Supp. 1041 (D.D.C.1973), vacated as moot, 422 U.S. 1030 , 95 S.Ct. 2646 , 45 L.Ed.2d 686 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bread Political Action Committee v. The Federal Election Commission
(2×)
See, e. g., ACLU v. Jennings, 366 F.Supp. 1041, 1049-52 (D.D.C.1973), vacated sub nom., Staats v. ACLU, 422 U.S. 1030 , 95 S.Ct. 2646 , 45 L.Ed.2d 686 (1975) (FECA provision held to be a prior restraint even though the Court acknowledged that it technically did not resemble a typical licensing system because the Act designated the media, not the government, to act as censor). 90 A statute subjecting First Amendment freedoms to a prior restraint will be upheld only if it enunciates definite and objective standards to guide the censor's discretion.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Matthews v. City of AtLantic City
(2×)
See also Hill v. Stone, 421 U.S. 289, 297 , 95 S.Ct. 1637, 1643 , 44 L.Ed.2d 172, 179 , reh. den., 422 U.S. 1029 , 95 S.Ct. 2617 , 45 L.Ed. 2d 686 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
No.
See , e.g. , United States v. National Society of Professional Engineers , 1974-2 Trade Cas. § 75, 415 (D.D.C. 1974), vacated and remanded "in light of Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar " (see discussion infra ), 45 L.Ed.2d 686 (1975); United States v. American Society of Civil Engineers , 1972 Trade Cas., § 73, 950 (S.D.N.Y. 1972); United States v. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants , 1972 Trade Cas., § 74,007 (D.D.C. 1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Doe v. Martin
(2×)
See also American Civil Liberties Union v. Jennings, 366 F.Supp. 1041 (D.D.C.1973) (3-judge court), 417 U.S. 944 , 94 S.Ct. 3066 , 41 L.Ed.2d 664 (1974), vacated, sub nom Staats v. ACLU, 422 U.S. 1030 , 95 S.Ct. 2646 , 45 L.Ed.2d 686 (1975); United States v. Finance Committee to Reelect the President, 165 U.S.App.D.C. 371 , 507 F.2d 1194, 1200-02 (1974). .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Staats, Comptroller General
v.
American Civil Liberties Union, Inc.
v.
American Civil Liberties Union, Inc.
No. 73-1413.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 23, 1975.
Cited by 23 opinions | Published
Appeal from D. C. D. C. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 417[*1031] U. S. 944.] Judgment vacated and case remanded with directions to dismiss the cause as moot. Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Reported below: 366 F. Supp. 1041.