7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 34 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 IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez Anchor | green | “dentical words used in different parts of the same statute are generally presumed to have the same meaning.” | 9 |
| 2 | United States v. Hansen | green | “speech intended to bring about a particular unlawful act has no social value; therefore, it is unprotected.” | 5 |
| 3 | IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez | green | “he normal rule of statutory interpretation that identical words used in different parts of the same statute are generally presumed to have the same meaning.” | 4 |
| 4 | Department of Treasury v. Muessel | green | “e have a rule of construction that the same word used in the same manner in different places in the same statute is presumed to be used with the same mean- ing.” | 4 |
| 5 | Scott Gibson v. Bryan Collier | green | “he wpath standards of care do not reflect medical consensus," and "here is no medical consensus that sex reassignment surgery is a necessary or even effective treatment for gender dysphoria.” | 4 |
| 6 | Speech First, Inc. v. Timothy L. Killeen | green | “if the plaintiff is likely to win on the merits, the balance of harms need not weigh as heavily in his favor.” | 4 |
| 7 | DM Trans, LLC v. Lindsey Scott | green | “unless the district court's legal conclusions were incorrect or its find- ings of fact were clearly erroneous, we afford the court's ulti- mate decision 'great deference.” | 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.