Hess v. Indiana
E179509
Hess v. Indiana is a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the limits of the First Amendment's "incitement" exception by holding that an antiwar protester's vulgar statement advocating future lawless action was protected speech.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Hess v. Indiana canonical | 1 |
| Hess v. State of Indiana | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1572449 — 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: Hess v. Indiana Context triple: [Brandenburg v. Ohio, subsequentCitationBy, Hess v. Indiana]
-
A.
Timbs v. Indiana
Timbs v. Indiana is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
B.
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.
-
C.
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.
-
D.
Scopes v. State
Scopes v. State was the 1927 Tennessee Supreme Court decision in the famous “Scopes Monkey Trial,” which tested the legality of teaching evolution in public schools and highlighted the clash between modern science and religious fundamentalism.
-
E.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
- 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: Hess v. Indiana Target entity description: Hess v. Indiana is a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the limits of the First Amendment's "incitement" exception by holding that an antiwar protester's vulgar statement advocating future lawless action was protected speech.
-
A.
Timbs v. Indiana
Timbs v. Indiana is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
B.
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.
-
C.
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.
-
D.
Scopes v. State
Scopes v. State was the 1927 Tennessee Supreme Court decision in the famous “Scopes Monkey Trial,” which tested the legality of teaching evolution in public schools and highlighted the clash between modern science and religious fundamentalism.
-
E.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
First Amendment case
ⓘ
U.S. Supreme Court case ⓘ freedom of speech case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
civil liberties
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ criminal law ⓘ |
| category |
United States Supreme Court case in the Burger Court era
ⓘ
United States free speech case ⓘ |
| citation | 414 U.S. 105 ⓘ |
| clarified |
requirement of imminence for unprotected incitement
ⓘ
scope of the incitement exception to the First Amendment ⓘ |
| 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 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1973-03-19 ⓘ |
| decisionType | per curiam opinion ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
Hess v. Indiana
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Hess v. State of Indiana
|
| holding |
The First Amendment protects speech that advocates illegal action at some indefinite future time and is not directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action.
ⓘ
The petitioner’s statement at an antiwar demonstration was protected speech under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. ⓘ |
| impact |
limited government power to punish advocacy of future lawless action
ⓘ
strengthened protection for offensive political speech ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| languageCharacterization | vulgar but protected political speech ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
First Amendment freedom of speech
ⓘ
incitement to lawless action ⓘ limits of the incitement exception to the First Amendment ⓘ |
| lowerCourt |
Indiana Supreme Court
ⓘ
surface form:
Supreme Court of Indiana
|
| lowerCourtOutcome | conviction affirmed ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy |
William O. Douglas
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice William O. Douglas
|
| oralArgumentDate | 1973-01-08 ⓘ |
| page | 105 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Gregory Hess ⓘ |
| precedent | Brandenburg v. Ohio ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine |
advocacy of illegal conduct
ⓘ
imminent lawless action ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent |
Indiana
ⓘ
surface form:
State of Indiana
|
| resultForPetitioner | conviction overturned ⓘ |
| standardApplied |
Brandenburg v. Ohio
ⓘ
surface form:
Brandenburg v. Ohio imminent lawless action test
|
| stateLawInvolved | Indiana disorderly conduct statute ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
antiwar protest
ⓘ
vulgar political expression ⓘ |
| supremeCourtOutcome | conviction reversed ⓘ |
| volume | 414 ⓘ |
| vote | 6-3 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1973 ⓘ |
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: Hess v. Indiana Description of subject: Hess v. Indiana is a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the limits of the First Amendment's "incitement" exception by holding that an antiwar protester's vulgar statement advocating future lawless action was protected speech.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Hess v. State of Indiana