Gooding v. Wilson
E1140382
UNEXPLORED
Gooding v. Wilson is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the “fighting words” doctrine and struck down a Georgia statute as unconstitutionally overbroad under the First Amendment.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Gooding v. Wilson canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T15156903 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Gooding v. Wilson Context triple: [Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, precedentFor, Gooding v. Wilson]
-
A.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
B.
Blakely v. Washington
Blakely v. Washington is a landmark 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that applied the Apprendi rule to state sentencing guidelines, holding that any fact increasing a defendant’s sentence beyond the statutory maximum must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
C.
Wilkins v. Gaddy
Wilkins v. Gaddy is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision clarifying that the core inquiry in Eighth Amendment excessive force claims is the nature of the force used rather than the extent of the inmate’s injury.
-
D.
Crawford v. Washington
Crawford v. Washington is a landmark 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reshaped Confrontation Clause jurisprudence by holding that testimonial hearsay is inadmissible against a criminal defendant unless the witness is unavailable and there was a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
-
E.
Shaw v. Hunt
Shaw v. Hunt is a 1996 U.S. Supreme Court case that further developed the Court’s racial gerrymandering jurisprudence by applying and extending the principles first articulated in Shaw v. Reno.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Gooding v. Wilson Target entity description: Gooding v. Wilson is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the “fighting words” doctrine and struck down a Georgia statute as unconstitutionally overbroad under the First Amendment.
-
A.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
B.
Blakely v. Washington
Blakely v. Washington is a landmark 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that applied the Apprendi rule to state sentencing guidelines, holding that any fact increasing a defendant’s sentence beyond the statutory maximum must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
C.
Wilkins v. Gaddy
Wilkins v. Gaddy is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision clarifying that the core inquiry in Eighth Amendment excessive force claims is the nature of the force used rather than the extent of the inmate’s injury.
-
D.
Crawford v. Washington
Crawford v. Washington is a landmark 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reshaped Confrontation Clause jurisprudence by holding that testimonial hearsay is inadmissible against a criminal defendant unless the witness is unavailable and there was a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
-
E.
Shaw v. Hunt
Shaw v. Hunt is a 1996 U.S. Supreme Court case that further developed the Court’s racial gerrymandering jurisprudence by applying and extending the principles first articulated in Shaw v. Reno.
- F. None of above. chosen
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.