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.
4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 62 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 Stanley v. Illinois.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stanley v. Illinois Anchor | green | “undeniably warrants deference and, absent a powerful countervailing interest, protection.” | 44 |
| 2 | In Re Juvenile Appeal | green | “rights of parents qua parents to the custody of their children is an important principle that has constitutional dimensions.” | 9 |
| 3 | In re Juvenile Appeal (83-CD) | green | “more than average certainty on the part of the fact finder.” | 6 |
| 4 | In re Rayna M. | green | “common sense dictates that the parent's obligations toward . . a child go further than a minimal interest.” | 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.