Baker v. Nelson (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Baker v. Nelson" in English language version.

refsWebsite

Global rank English rank

4supremecourt.gov

3,811^th place

2,160^th place

3domawatch.org

low place

3web.archive.org

1^st place

3scotusblog.com

7,147^th place

3,830^th place

2casetext.com

4,010^th place

2,209^th place

2doi.org

2^nd place

2jstor.org

26^th place

20^th place

2nytimes.com

7^th place

2scribd.com

482^nd place

552^nd place

2cbslocal.com

680^th place

412^th place

1law.com

3,163^rd place

1,731^st place

1books.google.com

3^rd place

1archives.gov

446^th place

308^th place

1usdoj.gov

2,755^th place

1,753^rd place

1openjurist.org

low place

5,885^th place

1washingtonpost.com

34^th place

27^th place

1buzzfeed.com

681^st place

492^nd place

1s3.amazonaws.com

1,540^th place

958^th place

1youtube.com

9^th place

13^th place

1mn.gov

8,440^th place

4,530^th place

archives.gov

catalog.archives.gov

"Baker v. Nelson, Case # 71-1027". National Archives and Records Administration. October 10, 1972. Retrieved June 16, 2016.

books.google.com

William Eskridge and Darren Spedale, Gay Marriage: For Better or Worse? What We've Learned from the Evidence 22 (2006). From Google Books. Retrieved May 19, 2016.

buzzfeed.com

Geidner, Chris (November 6, 2014). "Federal Appeals Court Upholds Four States' Same-Sex Marriage Bans". BuzzFeed News. Retrieved November 6, 2014.

casetext.com

"Baker v. Nelson, 291 Minn. 310, 191 N.W.2d 185 (Minn. 1971)". casetext.com.
"Baker v. Nelson, 291 Minn. 310, 191 N.W.2d 185 (Minn. 1971)". casetext.com.

cbslocal.com

minnesota.cbslocal.com

doi.org

Project, "Developments in the Law: The Constitution and the Family". Harvard Law Review. 93 (6): 1156–1383, 1274. 1980. doi:10.2307/1340703. JSTOR 1340703. (discussing Baker's posture as precedent); see, e.g. Winnick, Pamela R. (1976). "The Precedential Weight of a Dismissal by the Supreme Court for Want of a Substantial Federal Question: Some Implications of Hicks v. Miranda". Columbia Law Review. 76 (3): 508–533. doi:10.2307/1121552. JSTOR 1121552. a dismissal by the Supreme Court is an adjudication on the merits... a lower federal court must consider itself bound by the dismissal when a similar challenge comes before it
See, e.g. Mandel v. Bradley, 432 U.S. 173, 176 (1977) ("[D]ismissals for want of a substantial federal question without doubt reject the specific challenges presented in the statement of jurisdiction.... They do prevent lower courts from coming to opposite conclusions on the precise issues presented and necessarily decided by those actions."); see generally Note, t. l. p, Jr (1978). "The Precedential Effect of Summary Affirmances and Dismissals for Want of a Substantial Federal Question by the Supreme Court after Hicks v. Miranda and Mandel v. Bradley". Virginia Law Review. 64 (1): 117–143. doi:10.2307/1072545. JSTOR 1072545.

domawatch.org

Appellant's Jurisdictional Statement, Baker v. Nelson, Supreme Court docket no. 71-1027, at 3, available at DOMAwatch.org Archived 2007-09-28 at the Wayback Machine (accessed Oct. 28, 2009) (questions presented).
Appellant's Jurisdictional Statement, Baker v. Nelson, Supreme Court docket no. 71-1027, at 3, available at DOMAwatch.org Archived 2007-09-28 at the Wayback Machine (accessed Oct. 28, 2009) (questions presented).
Appellant's Jurisdictional Statement, Baker v. Nelson, Supreme Court docket no. 71-1027, at 3, available at DOMAwatch.org Archived 2007-09-28 at the Wayback Machine (accessed Oct. 28, 2009) (questions presented).

jstor.org

Project, "Developments in the Law: The Constitution and the Family". Harvard Law Review. 93 (6): 1156–1383, 1274. 1980. doi:10.2307/1340703. JSTOR 1340703. (discussing Baker's posture as precedent); see, e.g. Winnick, Pamela R. (1976). "The Precedential Weight of a Dismissal by the Supreme Court for Want of a Substantial Federal Question: Some Implications of Hicks v. Miranda". Columbia Law Review. 76 (3): 508–533. doi:10.2307/1121552. JSTOR 1121552. a dismissal by the Supreme Court is an adjudication on the merits... a lower federal court must consider itself bound by the dismissal when a similar challenge comes before it
See, e.g. Mandel v. Bradley, 432 U.S. 173, 176 (1977) ("[D]ismissals for want of a substantial federal question without doubt reject the specific challenges presented in the statement of jurisdiction.... They do prevent lower courts from coming to opposite conclusions on the precise issues presented and necessarily decided by those actions."); see generally Note, t. l. p, Jr (1978). "The Precedential Effect of Summary Affirmances and Dismissals for Want of a Substantial Federal Question by the Supreme Court after Hicks v. Miranda and Mandel v. Bradley". Virginia Law Review. 64 (1): 117–143. doi:10.2307/1072545. JSTOR 1072545.

law.com

Coyle, Marcia (August 23, 2010). "The first case, 40 years on". The National Law Journal.

mn.gov

moms.mn.gov

The marriage certificate is available online in Minnesota Official Marriage System (MOMS). Search for Blue Earth, [Both Applicants], Pat Lyn McConnell, 9/3/1971.

nytimes.com

Davey, Monica (May 14, 2013). "Minnesota: Governor Signs Same-Sex Marriage Into Law". New York Times. Retrieved June 30, 2015.
Eckholm, Erik (May 16, 2015). "The Same-Sex Couple Who Got a Marriage License in 1971". New York Times. Retrieved May 24, 2015.

openjurist.org

See, e.g. Mandel v. Bradley, 432 U.S. 173, 176 (1977) ("[D]ismissals for want of a substantial federal question without doubt reject the specific challenges presented in the statement of jurisdiction.... They do prevent lower courts from coming to opposite conclusions on the precise issues presented and necessarily decided by those actions."); see generally Note, t. l. p, Jr (1978). "The Precedential Effect of Summary Affirmances and Dismissals for Want of a Substantial Federal Question by the Supreme Court after Hicks v. Miranda and Mandel v. Bradley". Virginia Law Review. 64 (1): 117–143. doi:10.2307/1072545. JSTOR 1072545.

s3.amazonaws.com

"DeBoer v. Snyder, November 6, 2014" (PDF). Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Retrieved November 7, 2014.

scotusblog.com

Carpenter, Dale (October 7, 2014). "Symposium: Judge Sutton's trilemma". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved October 18, 2014.
Denniston, Lyle (October 21, 2014). "Puerto Rico ban on same-sex marriage upheld". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved October 22, 2014.
Denniston, Lyle (October 21, 2014). "Puerto Rico ban on same-sex marriage upheld". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved October 22, 2014.

scribd.com

Baker v. Nelson, 409 810 (U.S. 1972) ("The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.").
"Opinion and Order". U.S. District Court for Puerto Rico. Retrieved October 21, 2014.

supremecourt.gov

Obergefell v. Hodges, No. 14-556, 576 U.S. 644 (2015).
Obergefell v. Hodges, No. 14-556, 576 U.S. 644 (2015).
Obergefell v. Hodges, No. 14-556, 576 U.S. 644 (2015).
Obergefell v. Hodges, No. 14-556, 576 U.S. 644 (2015).

usdoj.gov

See, e.g. Briefing Glossary, Office of the Solicitor General website (see "Appellate jurisdiction" and "Certiorari"; accessed Oct. 25, 2009).

washingtonpost.com

Barnes, Robert (August 17, 2014). "Supreme Court: Was gay marriage settled in 1972 case?". Washington Post. Retrieved October 3, 2014.

web.archive.org

Appellant's Jurisdictional Statement, Baker v. Nelson, Supreme Court docket no. 71-1027, at 3, available at DOMAwatch.org Archived 2007-09-28 at the Wayback Machine (accessed Oct. 28, 2009) (questions presented).
Appellant's Jurisdictional Statement, Baker v. Nelson, Supreme Court docket no. 71-1027, at 3, available at DOMAwatch.org Archived 2007-09-28 at the Wayback Machine (accessed Oct. 28, 2009) (questions presented).
Appellant's Jurisdictional Statement, Baker v. Nelson, Supreme Court docket no. 71-1027, at 3, available at DOMAwatch.org Archived 2007-09-28 at the Wayback Machine (accessed Oct. 28, 2009) (questions presented).

youtube.com

First Gay Wedding in Minnesota - Jack Baker & Mike McConnell, 1971 on YouTube