5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 19 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 Selkirk Conservation Alliance v. Forsgren.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Selkirk Conservation Alliance v. Forsgren Anchor | green | “considered the relevant factors and articulated a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.” | 6 |
| 2 | Churchill County v. Gale A. Norton | green | “foster both informed decisionmaking and informed public participation.” | 4 |
| 3 | Navajo Nation v. U.S. Forest Service | green | “selecting the alternative that best achieves the forest service's multiple-use mandate under the national forest management act,” | 4 |
| 4 | Center For Biological Diversity v. United States Forest Service | green | “a reasonably thorough discussion of the significant aspects of the probable environmental consequences.” | 3 |
| 5 | Navajo Nation v. U.S. Forest Service | green | “needed to maintain the viability of the snowbowl as a public recreational resource.” | 2 |
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.