United States v. Guest
E118717
United States v. Guest is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the federal government can prosecute private conspiracies to interfere with constitutional rights, particularly the right to travel, under certain circumstances.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| United States v. Guest canonical | 2 |
| United States v. Guest et al. | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T998742 — 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: United States v. Guest Context triple: [Saenz v. Roe, followedPrecedent, United States v. Guest]
-
A.
United States v. Comstock
United States v. Comstock is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s authority to civilly commit mentally ill, sexually dangerous federal prisoners beyond their release date under the Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause.
-
B.
Gebhart v. Belton
Gebhart v. Belton was a landmark Delaware school segregation case whose rulings in favor of Black students became one of the four consolidated cases decided in Brown v. Board of Education, contributing to the Supreme Court’s rejection of “separate but equal” in public education.
-
C.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
D.
Bond v. United States
Bond v. United States is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified an individual’s ability to raise Tenth Amendment challenges to federal statutes, reinforcing limits on federal power in favor of state sovereignty.
-
E.
Abrams v. United States
Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
- 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: United States v. Guest Target entity description: United States v. Guest is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the federal government can prosecute private conspiracies to interfere with constitutional rights, particularly the right to travel, under certain circumstances.
-
A.
United States v. Comstock
United States v. Comstock is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s authority to civilly commit mentally ill, sexually dangerous federal prisoners beyond their release date under the Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause.
-
B.
Gebhart v. Belton
Gebhart v. Belton was a landmark Delaware school segregation case whose rulings in favor of Black students became one of the four consolidated cases decided in Brown v. Board of Education, contributing to the Supreme Court’s rejection of “separate but equal” in public education.
-
C.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
D.
Bond v. United States
Bond v. United States is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified an individual’s ability to raise Tenth Amendment challenges to federal statutes, reinforcing limits on federal power in favor of state sovereignty.
-
E.
Abrams v. United States
Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
U.S. Supreme Court case
ⓘ
civil rights case ⓘ criminal law case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
federal criminal civil rights enforcement ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1965-11-09 ⓘ |
| citation | 383 U.S. 745 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Abe Fortas
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Abe Fortas
Tom C. Clark ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Tom C. Clark
William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ
surface form:
Justice William J. Brennan Jr.
|
| concurrenceInPartDissentInPartBy |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Byron White
John M. Harlan II ⓘ
surface form:
Justice John M. Harlan II
Potter Stewart ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Potter Stewart
|
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Commerce Clause
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Privileges and Immunities related doctrines on interstate travel ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1966-03-28 ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 65 ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
United States v. Guest
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
United States v. Guest et al.
|
| holding |
18 U.S.C. § 241 reaches private conspiracies to interfere with the exercise of federal constitutional rights when there is sufficient state involvement
ⓘ
the constitutional right to travel from state to state is a protected federal right ⓘ the federal government may prosecute certain private conspiracies to interfere with the constitutional right to travel ⓘ |
| impact |
cited as precedent on the constitutional right to travel
ⓘ
expanded federal authority to prosecute private conspiracies involving state officials that interfere with constitutional rights ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Earl Warren
ⓘ
surface form:
Chief Justice Earl Warren
Byron R. White ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Byron White
Hugo L. Black ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Hugo Black
Tom C. Clark ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Tom C. Clark
William O. Douglas ⓘ
surface form:
Justice William O. Douglas
|
| jurisdiction | United States federal jurisdiction ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
federal power to prosecute private conspiracies to interfere with constitutional rights
ⓘ
right to interstate travel under the Constitution ⓘ scope of 18 U.S.C. § 241 ⓘ state action requirement under the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy |
Potter Stewart
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Potter Stewart
|
| page | 745 ⓘ |
| petitioner |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| rearguedDate | 1966-01-17 ⓘ |
| recognizedRight | constitutional right to interstate travel ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Griffin v. Breckenridge
ⓘ
Shapiro v. Thompson ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent | Guest ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted | 18 U.S.C. § 241 ⓘ |
| volume | 383 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1966 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: United States v. Guest Description of subject: United States v. Guest is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the federal government can prosecute private conspiracies to interfere with constitutional rights, particularly the right to travel, under certain circumstances.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
United States v. Guest et al.