5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 35 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 Virginia v. LeBlanc.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Virginia v. LeBlanc Anchor | green | “in order for a state court's decision to be an unreasonable application of this court's case law, the ruling must be objectively unreasonable, not merely wrong; even clear error will not suffice” | 11 |
| 2 | Orlando v. Nassau Cnty. Dist. Attorney's Office | green | “unreasonable application" standard of 2254(d)(1) is a "bar is not reached where fairminded jurists could disagree on the correctness of the state court's decision” | 10 |
| 3 | Brumfield v. Cain | green | “as we have also observed, however, even in the context of federal habeas, deference does not imply abandonment or abdication of judicial review, and does not by definition preclude relief.” | 7 |
| 4 | William Daye v. Attorney General of the State of New York and Eugene Le Fevre, Superintendent, Greenhaven Correctional Facility | green | “in order to have fairly presented his federal claim to the state courts, the petitioner must have informed the state court of both the factual and the legal premises of the claim he asserts in federal court” | 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.