7 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 30 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Pearson v. Shalala.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pearson v. Shalala Anchor | green | “significant scientific agreement” | 6 |
| 2 | Pearson v. Shalala | green | “where evidence in support of a claim is outweighed by evidence against the claim, the fda could deem it incurable by a disclaimer and ban it outright.” | 5 |
| 3 | Pearson v. Shalala | green | “inherently misleading and thus entirely outside the protection of the first amendment” | 5 |
| 4 | Pearson v. Thompson | green | “failure to fully and accurately describe the record evidence” | 4 |
| 5 | Pearson v. Shalala | green | “significant scientific agreement” | 4 |
| 6 | Pearson v. Shalala | green | “enjoining the fda from taking any action which would prevent plaintiffs from using their desired folic acid health claim.” | 3 |
| 7 | Pearson v. Shalala | green | “fundamentally misread and misapplied the legal standard articulated” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.