Whitney v. California
E179507
Whitney v. California was a 1927 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a conviction under a state criminal syndicalism law and became historically significant for Justice Brandeis’s influential concurrence on free speech before later being overruled.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Whitney v. California canonical | 4 |
| Whitney v. California concurrence | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1572426 — 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: Whitney v. California Context triple: [Brandenburg v. Ohio, overruledPrecedent, Whitney v. California]
-
A.
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Cantwell v. Connecticut is a 1940 U.S. Supreme Court case that first applied the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause to the states, striking down a state law that improperly restricted religious proselytizing.
-
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.
Reed v. Reed
Reed v. Reed is a landmark 1971 U.S. Supreme Court case that for the first time struck down a law for discriminating on the basis of sex under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
D.
De Jonge v. Oregon
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.
-
E.
Employment Division v. Smith
Employment Division v. Smith is a landmark 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed protections for religious practices under the Free Exercise Clause by upholding the enforcement of neutral, generally applicable laws even when they incidentally burden religion.
- 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: Whitney v. California Target entity description: Whitney v. California was a 1927 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a conviction under a state criminal syndicalism law and became historically significant for Justice Brandeis’s influential concurrence on free speech before later being overruled.
-
A.
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Cantwell v. Connecticut is a 1940 U.S. Supreme Court case that first applied the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause to the states, striking down a state law that improperly restricted religious proselytizing.
-
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.
Reed v. Reed
Reed v. Reed is a landmark 1971 U.S. Supreme Court case that for the first time struck down a law for discriminating on the basis of sex under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
D.
De Jonge v. Oregon
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.
-
E.
Employment Division v. Smith
Employment Division v. Smith is a landmark 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed protections for religious practices under the Free Exercise Clause by upholding the enforcement of neutral, generally applicable laws even when they incidentally burden religion.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (50)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
First Amendment case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ criminal syndicalism case ⓘ |
| allegation | membership in an organization advocating criminal syndicalism ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ free speech jurisprudence ⓘ |
| charge | criminal syndicalism ⓘ |
| citation | 274 U.S. 357 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Justice Louis D. Brandeis
ⓘ
surface form:
Louis D. Brandeis
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
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 ⓘ |
| decade | 1920s ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1927-05-16 ⓘ |
| defendant | Charlotte Anita Whitney ⓘ |
| famousFor |
Justice Brandeis’s concurring opinion on free speech and democratic deliberation
ⓘ
articulation of the idea that more speech, not enforced silence, is the remedy for harmful speech ⓘ |
| fullName | Whitney v. California self-link ⓘ |
| historicalSignificance |
important early case on the limits of political advocacy and subversive speech
ⓘ
influential for later First Amendment doctrine despite its holding being rejected ⓘ |
| holding |
The Supreme Court held that California’s criminal syndicalism statute, as applied, did not violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
ⓘ
The Supreme Court upheld the defendant’s conviction under California’s criminal syndicalism law. ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| laterTreatment | overruled ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
application of the First Amendment to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ criminal syndicalism statutes ⓘ freedom of assembly ⓘ freedom of speech ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Justice Edward Terry Sanford ⓘ |
| opinionBy | Edward Terry Sanford NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| outcome | conviction affirmed ⓘ |
| overruledBy | Brandenburg v. Ohio ⓘ |
| overruledByCitation | 395 U.S. 444 ⓘ |
| page | 357 ⓘ |
| party | Charlotte Anita Whitney ⓘ |
| plaintiff |
California, United States
ⓘ
surface form:
State of California
|
| relatedCase |
Brandenburg v. Ohio
ⓘ
Gitlow v. New York ⓘ Schenck v. United States ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| standardDiscussed | clear and present danger ⓘ |
| stateLawInvolved |
California, United States
ⓘ
surface form:
California
|
| statuteInvolved | California Criminal Syndicalism Act ⓘ |
| timePeriod |
Lochner v. New York
ⓘ
surface form:
Lochner era
|
| volume | 274 ⓘ |
| vote | unanimous in result ⓘ |
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: Whitney v. California Description of subject: Whitney v. California was a 1927 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a conviction under a state criminal syndicalism law and became historically significant for Justice Brandeis’s influential concurrence on free speech before later being overruled.
Referenced by (5)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
subject surface form:
Louis D. Brandeis
this entity surface form:
Whitney v. California concurrence