4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 12 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 Liverpool, New York & Philadelphia Steamship Co. v. Commissioners of Emigration.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Liverpool, New York & Philadelphia Steamship Co. v. Commissioners of Emigration Anchor | green | “has no jurisdiction to pronounce any statute . . . irreconcilable with the constitution, except as it is called upon to adjudge the legal rights of litigants in actual controversies” | 3 |
| 2 | Muskrat v. United States | green | “here s no general veto power in the court upon the legislation of congress” | 3 |
| 3 | Dahnke-Walker Milling Co. v. Bondurant | green | “litigant can be heard to question a statute's validity only when and so far as it is being or is about to be applied to his disadvantage” | 3 |
| 4 | NetChoice, LLC v. Attorney General, State of Florida | green | “unless posts and users are removed randomly, those sorts of actions necessarily convey some sort of message-most ob- viously, the platforms' disagreement with . . . certain content” | 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.