5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 152 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 Consolo v. Federal Maritime Commission.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Consolo v. Federal Maritime Commission Anchor | green | “the possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the evidence does not prevent an administrative agency's finding from being supported by substantial evidence.” | 102 |
| 2 | Timex v. United States | green | “to ascertain whether congress had an intention on the precise question at issue, the court employs the 'traditional tools of statutory construction.” | 23 |
| 3 | American Spring Wire Corp. v. United States | green | “the court may not substitute its judgment for that of the agency when the choice is 'between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo.” | 21 |
| 4 | American Spring Wire Corp. v. United States | green | “between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo.” | 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.