A little search in Google Books indicates both are commonly used, but I cannot see any semantic difference:
Scholarly research can show how government subsidies benefit mostly
the rich, not the poor, as is the case for gasoline subsidies in the
Islamic Republic of Iran.As is the case for most newly introduced high-tech services,
crowdsourcing raises both hopes and doubts, and certainties and
questions.The important point to stress is that a radar imager, like a bat,
principally obtains information as a function of distance from the
instrument, rather than look direction, as is the case for optical
systems.Keeping confidentiality may result in future harm to some identifiable
person other than the patient, as is the case with the prostitute and
her boyfriend and the drug-treatment patient and his girlfriend.Of the others, uncombined carbon burns with little or no flame, just
as is the case with pure charcoal and coke.
My best guess is: with "for", it introduces the direct object for comparison; with "with", it introduces the scenario for comparison. So in practical terms, there's no salient difference between them. Do I get it right?
Best Answer
As is the case with... means as is also true about... If this is the meaning you are looking for, you can always use with. With could be used in all of the examples in the above text; I personally would use with instead of for in all of them. On the other hand, with and for are pretty much interchangeable here.
Now, the case for also has the meaning of those facts that support a case. So, you might say this:
I'm saying here that consistency is a reason to substitute with for for. The case with... would be incorrect in this situation.