3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 18 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 CAMP Legal Defense Fund, Inc. v. City of Atlanta.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CAMP Legal Defense Fund, Inc. v. City of Atlanta Anchor | green | “a plaintiff who has established constitutional injury under a provision of a statute as applied to his set of facts may also bring a facial challenge, under the overbreadth doctrine, to vindicate the rights of others not before the court under that provision.” | 9 |
| 2 | Secretary of State of Md. v. Joseph H. Munson Co. | green | “the crucial issues for overbreadth standing are whether the plaintiff satisfies the requirement of injury-in-fact, and whether the plaintiff can be expected satisfactorily to frame the issues in the case.” | 6 |
| 3 | Prime Media, Inc. v. City of Brentwood, Tennessee | green | “a law's application to protected speech must be substantial, not only in an absolute sense, but also relative to the scope of the law's plainly legitimate applications, before applying the strong medicine of overbreadth invalidation.” | 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.