Paroline v. United States
E1201233
UNEXPLORED
Paroline v. United States is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified how courts should calculate restitution owed by defendants in child pornography cases to the victims depicted.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Paroline v. United States canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T16205752 — 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: Paroline v. United States Context triple: [October Term 2013, hasPart, Paroline v. United States]
-
A.
Salinas v. United States
Salinas v. United States is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision that broadened the scope of RICO liability by holding that a defendant can be convicted of racketeering conspiracy without personally committing or agreeing to commit two predicate acts.
-
B.
Adair v. United States
Adair v. United States is a 1908 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a federal law protecting railroad workers’ union membership, holding that it violated employers’ freedom of contract under the Fifth Amendment.
-
C.
Wright v. United States
Wright v. United States is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the scope of presidential veto power and the constitutional requirements for lawmaking under the Presentment Clause.
-
D.
Dorr v. United States
Dorr v. United States is a 1904 U.S. Supreme Court decision that helped define the limited application of constitutional rights in unincorporated territories under the Insular Cases doctrine.
-
E.
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.
- 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: Paroline v. United States Target entity description: Paroline v. United States is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified how courts should calculate restitution owed by defendants in child pornography cases to the victims depicted.
-
A.
Salinas v. United States
Salinas v. United States is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision that broadened the scope of RICO liability by holding that a defendant can be convicted of racketeering conspiracy without personally committing or agreeing to commit two predicate acts.
-
B.
Adair v. United States
Adair v. United States is a 1908 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a federal law protecting railroad workers’ union membership, holding that it violated employers’ freedom of contract under the Fifth Amendment.
-
C.
Wright v. United States
Wright v. United States is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the scope of presidential veto power and the constitutional requirements for lawmaking under the Presentment Clause.
-
D.
Dorr v. United States
Dorr v. United States is a 1904 U.S. Supreme Court decision that helped define the limited application of constitutional rights in unincorporated territories under the Insular Cases doctrine.
-
E.
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.
- F. None of above. chosen
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.