7 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 26 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 Richard J. Orloski v. Federal Election Commission.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Richard J. Orloski v. Federal Election Commission Anchor | green | “arbitrary or capricious, or an abuse of discretion.” | 4 |
| 2 | Federal Election Commission v. National Republican Senatorial Committee | green | “necessarily states the agency's reasons for acting as it did.” | 4 |
| 3 | Responsibility v. Fed. Election Comm'n | green | “placed their judgment squarely on the ground of prosecutorial discretion.” | 4 |
| 4 | Responsibility v. Fed. Election Comm'n | green | “agency enforcement decisions, to the extent they are committed to agency discretion, are not subject to judicial review for abuse of discretion.” | 4 |
| 5 | Responsibility v. Fed. Election Comm'n | green | “exercise of its prosecutorial discretion cannot be subjected to judicial scrutiny.” | 4 |
| 6 | Ctzn Respsble WA v. FEC | green | “the supreme court in akins recognized that the commission, like other executive agencies, retains prosecutorial discretion.” | 3 |
| 7 | Common Cause v. Federal Election Commission | green | “the statute clearly requires that for any official commission decision there must be at least a 4-2 majority vote.” | 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.