De Jonge v. Oregon
E176633
De Jonge v. Oregon is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the right to peaceful assembly is a fundamental liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and thus applies to the states.
All labels observed (3)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| De Jonge v. Oregon canonical | 2 |
| De Jonge v. State of Oregon | 1 |
| State v. De Jonge, 152 Or. 315, 53 P.2d 1078 (1936) | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1538839 — 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: De Jonge v. Oregon Context triple: [Assembly Clause, usedInCase, De Jonge v. Oregon]
-
A.
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.
-
B.
Eisenstadt v. Baird
Eisenstadt v. Baird is a landmark 1972 U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended the right to possess and use contraceptives to unmarried individuals, significantly advancing privacy and equal protection jurisprudence.
-
C.
Ex parte Young
Ex parte Young is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court decision that created a legal fiction allowing suits in federal court against state officials to stop ongoing violations of federal law, despite state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.
-
D.
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.
-
E.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
- 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: De Jonge v. Oregon Target entity description: De Jonge v. Oregon is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the right to peaceful assembly is a fundamental liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and thus applies to the states.
-
A.
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.
-
B.
Eisenstadt v. Baird
Eisenstadt v. Baird is a landmark 1972 U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended the right to possess and use contraceptives to unmarried individuals, significantly advancing privacy and equal protection jurisprudence.
-
C.
Ex parte Young
Ex parte Young is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court decision that created a legal fiction allowing suits in federal court against state officials to stop ongoing violations of federal law, despite state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.
-
D.
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.
-
E.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
First Amendment case
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment case ⓘ U.S. Supreme Court case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| appliedToStatesThrough |
Due Process Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
|
| areaOfLaw |
First Amendment jurisprudence
ⓘ
civil liberties ⓘ constitutional law ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1936-12-09 ⓘ |
| citation | 299 U.S. 353 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInvolved |
First 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 | 1937-01-04 ⓘ |
| decisionType | unanimous decision ⓘ |
| doctrine | incorporation of the freedom of assembly against the states ⓘ |
| era | Hughes Court ⓘ |
| factualBackground | Dirk De Jonge was convicted for speaking at a peaceful public meeting held under the auspices of the Communist Party in Portland, Oregon ⓘ |
| fullName |
De Jonge v. Oregon
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
De Jonge v. State of Oregon
|
| holding |
A state may not make participation in a peaceful public meeting a crime merely because the meeting is held under the auspices of a group that advocates or teaches criminal syndicalism
ⓘ
The right of peaceable assembly is a fundamental right protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and is applicable to the states ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| keyword |
civil rights
ⓘ
criminal syndicalism ⓘ incorporation doctrine ⓘ peaceable assembly ⓘ political dissent ⓘ |
| legalIssue | whether the right of peaceable assembly is protected against state infringement by the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| opinionBy | Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes ⓘ |
| page | 353 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Dirk De Jonge ⓘ |
| principle |
Guilt is personal and may not be imposed solely because of association with a group
ⓘ
Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime ⓘ |
| priorHistory |
De Jonge v. Oregon
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
State v. De Jonge, 152 Or. 315, 53 P.2d 1078 (1936)
|
| relatedCase |
Gitlow v. New York
ⓘ
Hague v. CIO ⓘ NAACP v. Alabama ⓘ Whitney v. California ⓘ |
| relatedOrganization |
Communist Party USA
ⓘ
surface form:
Communist Party
|
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent |
Oregon
ⓘ
surface form:
State of Oregon
|
| result | Oregon conviction of Dirk De Jonge reversed ⓘ |
| rightRecognized |
freedom of assembly
ⓘ
freedom of speech ⓘ |
| stateLawChallenged | Oregon criminal syndicalism statute ⓘ |
| volume | 299 ⓘ |
| vote | 9-0 ⓘ |
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: De Jonge v. Oregon Description of subject: De Jonge v. Oregon is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the right to peaceful assembly is a fundamental liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and thus applies to the states.
Referenced by (4)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
De Jonge v. State of Oregon
this entity surface form:
State v. De Jonge, 152 Or. 315, 53 P.2d 1078 (1936)