7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 416 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 Gonzalez v. Thaler.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gonzalez v. Thaler Anchor | green | “that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.” | 99 |
| 2 | United States v. Riggs | green | “not intended for those who sleep on their rights.” | 80 |
| 3 | McQuiggin v. Perkins | green | “only if he shows (1) that he has been pursuing his rights diligently, and (2) that some extraordinary circumstance stood in his way and prevented timely filing.” | 79 |
| 4 | Gonzalez v. Thaler | green | “jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.” | 56 |
| 5 | Picard v. Connor | green | “to give the state an initial opportunity to pass upon and correct alleged violations of its prisoners' federal rights.” | 38 |
| 6 | Armando Castillo v. James McFadden Arizona Attorney General | green | “mere 'general appeals to broad constitutional principles, such as due process, equal protection, and the right to a fair trial,' do not establish exhaustion.” | 38 |
| 7 | Stroman v. Thaler | green | “eleven-month delay in filing his initial state application weighs against a finding of diligence.” | 26 |
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.