6 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 20 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 Paul Devorkin.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Daniel Paul Devorkin Anchor | green | “there is a grievous ambiguity or uncertainty in the language and structure of the statute, such that even after a court has seized every thing from which aid can be derived, it is still left with an ambiguous statute.” | 4 |
| 2 | United States v. Nader | green | “the rule of lenity requires ambiguous criminal laws to be interpreted in favor of the defendants subjected to them.” | 4 |
| 3 | United States of America, Robin L. Harris v. Virgilio Talao | green | “declined to announce a categorical rule excusing all such communications from ethical inquiry.” | 3 |
| 4 | United States v. Vampire Nation A/K/A Fredrik Von Hamilton A/K/A Frederick Hamilton Banks, Frederick H. Banks | green | “change his story and tell them that he didn't know what he was talking about” | 3 |
| 5 | United States v. Nader | green | “no individual be forced to speculate, at peril of indictment, whether his conduct is prohibited.” | 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.