3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 29 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 United States v. Stanley.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Stanley Anchor | green | “there is any reason to think that 'judicial intrusion' into a given field might be 'harmful' or 'inappropriate” | 13 |
| 2 | Hernández v. Mesa | green | “there are any special factors that counsel hesitation” | 12 |
| 3 | John Kalu v. Spaulding | green | “far broader in scope than that in carlson.” | 4 |
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.