Topic: for starters, we doubt that three colonial regulations coul… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #936

7 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 30 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 New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen Anchor
scotus · 2022
green “for starters, we doubt that three colonial regulations could suffice to show a tradition of public-carry regulation.” 6
2 Township of Pine Grove v. Talcott
scotus · 1874
green “though the corporation was private, its work was public, as much so as if it were to be constructed by the state.” 4
3 Pennsylvania Railroad v. Towers
scotus · 1917
green “a railroad company, although a quasi public corpo- ration, and although it operates a public highway has, never- theless, rights which the legislature cannot take away without a violation of the federal constitution....” 4
4 Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Ass'n v. Gannett Co.
ca7 · 2011
green “where the state acts as a proprietor ... its action will not be subjected to the heightened review to which its actions as a lawmaker may be subject.” 4
5 Pennsylvania Railroad v. Langdon
pa · 1880
green “the right of a railroad company to make reasonable rules for its own protection, and for the safety and convenience of passengers, has been repeatedly recognised.” 4
6 Poole v. Northern Pacific Railroad
or · 1888
green “for its own safety and con- venience, and that of the public, a railroad company may make reasonable rules and regulations for the management of its business, and the conduct of its passengers.” 4
7 United States v. Rahimi
scotus · 2024
green “the conclusion that focused regulations ... are not a his- torical analogue for a broad prohibitory regime like new york's does not mean that they cannot be an appropriate analogue for a narrow one.” 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.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check