4 canonical passages across 3 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 Abbott v. Perez.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Abbott v. Perez Anchor | green | “whenever a challenger claims that a state law was enacted with discriminatory intent, the burden of proof lies with the challenger, not the state.” | 7 |
| 2 | Bulova Watch Co. v. Brand Distributors of North Wilkesboro, Inc. | green | “however, in the construction of the provision of the state constitution, the meaning given by the supreme court of the united states to even an identical term in the constitution of the united states is, though highly persuasive, not binding upon this court.” | 5 |
| 3 | Bulova Watch Co. v. Brand Distributors of North Wilkesboro, Inc. | green | “in the construction of the provision of the state constitution, the meaning given by the supreme court of the united states to even an identical term in the constitution of the united states is, though highly persuasive, not binding upon this court.” | 4 |
| 4 | Blankenship v. Bartlett | green | “this court's analysis of the state constitution's equal protection clause generally follows the analysis of the supreme court of the united states in interpreting the corresponding federal clause.” | 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.