Malloy v. Hogan
E137554
Malloy v. Hogan is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Malloy v. Hogan canonical | 6 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1213133 — 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: Malloy v. Hogan Context triple: [Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, influencedDecision, Malloy v. Hogan]
-
A.
Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan
Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan is a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a state-supported women-only nursing school policy as unconstitutional sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
B.
Alden v. Maine
Alden v. Maine is a 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded state sovereign immunity by holding that states are generally immune from private suits for damages in their own courts under federal law.
-
C.
Milliken v. Bradley
Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by ruling that courts could not impose cross-district busing plans absent proof of interdistrict segregation.
-
D.
Palko v. Connecticut
Palko v. Connecticut is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that helped define the doctrine of selective incorporation by holding that only certain fundamental rights in the Bill of Rights apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
E.
Corrigan v. Buckley
Corrigan v. Buckley is a 1926 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the enforceability of racially restrictive covenants in property deeds, paving the way for widespread legalized housing segregation until later overturned in effect by subsequent civil rights rulings.
- 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: Malloy v. Hogan Target entity description: Malloy v. Hogan is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
A.
Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan
Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan is a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a state-supported women-only nursing school policy as unconstitutional sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
B.
Alden v. Maine
Alden v. Maine is a 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded state sovereign immunity by holding that states are generally immune from private suits for damages in their own courts under federal law.
-
C.
Milliken v. Bradley
Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by ruling that courts could not impose cross-district busing plans absent proof of interdistrict segregation.
-
D.
Palko v. Connecticut
Palko v. Connecticut is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that helped define the doctrine of selective incorporation by holding that only certain fundamental rights in the Bill of Rights apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
E.
Corrigan v. Buckley
Corrigan v. Buckley is a 1926 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the enforceability of racially restrictive covenants in property deeds, paving the way for widespread legalized housing segregation until later overturned in effect by subsequent civil rights rulings.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
criminal procedure case ⓘ |
| appliesTo |
state courts
ⓘ
state criminal proceedings ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ |
| chiefJusticeAtTime | Earl Warren ⓘ |
| citation | 378 U.S. 1 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1964-06-15 ⓘ |
| dissentingJustices |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
John M. Harlan II ⓘ Potter Stewart ⓘ Tom C. Clark ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy |
John M. Harlan II
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice John M. Harlan II
|
| fullName | Malloy v. Hogan self-link ⓘ |
| holding |
The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against abridgment by the states.
ⓘ
The same standards for the privilege against self-incrimination apply to state and federal proceedings. ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
Connecticut
ⓘ
surface form:
State of Connecticut
|
| languageOfDecision | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination
application of Bill of Rights to the states ⓘ incorporation doctrine ⓘ |
| limitedOrRejectedPrecedent | Adamson v. California ⓘ |
| majorityJustices |
Arthur J. Goldberg
ⓘ
Earl Warren ⓘ Hugo L. Black ⓘ William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ William O. Douglas ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy |
William J. Brennan Jr.
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice William J. Brennan Jr.
|
| overruledPrecedent | Twining v. New Jersey ⓘ |
| pageInUnitedStatesReports | 1 ⓘ |
| partOf | jurisprudence of the Warren Court ⓘ |
| petitioner | William Malloy ⓘ |
| precedentialStatus | binding precedent ⓘ |
| principle | States may not compel a person to incriminate himself in violation of the Fifth Amendment privilege as incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment. ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Griffin v. California
ⓘ
Miranda v. Arizona ⓘ |
| respondent | Warden Hogan ⓘ |
| topic |
selective incorporation
ⓘ
self-incrimination ⓘ |
| volumeOfUnitedStatesReports | 378 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1964 ⓘ |
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: Malloy v. Hogan Description of subject: Malloy v. Hogan is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Referenced by (6)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.