5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 24 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. Daniel Chovan.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Daniel Chovan Anchor | green | “(1) asks whether the challenged law burdens conduct protected by the second amendment and (2) if so, directs courts to apply an appropriate level of scrutiny.” | 7 |
| 2 | United States v. Daniel Chovan | green | “(1) the government's stated objective to be significant, substantial, or important; and (2) a reasonable fit between the challenged regulation and the asserted objective.” | 6 |
| 3 | United States v. Daniel Chovan | green | “apply an appropriate level of scrutiny.” | 4 |
| 4 | Espanola Jackson v. City and County of San Francis | green | “based on a 'historical understanding of the scope of the second amendment right.” | 4 |
| 5 | Leonard Fyock v. City of Sunnyvale | green | “promotes a substantial government interest that would be achieved less effectively absent the regulation.” | 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.