Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 16 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 Deem v. DiMella-Deem.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Deem v. DiMella-Deem Anchor | green | “the whole subject of the domestic relations of husband and wife, parent and child, belongs to the laws of the states, and not to the laws of the united states.” | 8 |
| 2 | Cavanaugh v. Geballe | green | “may . . . further counsel in favor of abstention” | 4 |
| 3 | Khalid v. Sessions | green | “it hardly bears repeating that state courts have a paramount if not exclusive interest in child custody cases.” | 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.