United States, Petitioner v. Antonio J. Morrison et al.
E245902
United States v. Morrison is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court struck down parts of the Violence Against Women Act as exceeding Congress’s powers under the Commerce Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| United States, Petitioner v. Antonio J. Morrison et al. canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T2219711 — 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: United States, Petitioner v. Antonio J. Morrison et al. Context triple: [United States v. Morrison, fullCaseName, United States, Petitioner v. Antonio J. Morrison et al.]
-
A.
United States v. [Accused]
"United States v. [Accused]" is the standard case caption format used in criminal prosecutions brought by the U.S. government against individual service members in the military justice system.
-
B.
United States of America v. Ulrich Greifelt, et al.
United States of America v. Ulrich Greifelt, et al. was a post–World War II Nuremberg Military Tribunal case prosecuting SS officials for racial policies, including kidnapping, Germanization, and persecution in occupied Eastern Europe.
-
C.
United States v. Eichman
United States v. Eichman is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a federal law banning flag desecration as unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.
-
D.
United States of America v. Karl Brandt et al.
United States of America v. Karl Brandt et al. was a post–World War II Nuremberg military tribunal case prosecuting Nazi physicians and officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity arising from inhumane medical experiments and the euthanasia program.
-
E.
United States v. Guest
United States v. Guest is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the federal government can prosecute private conspiracies to interfere with constitutional rights, particularly the right to travel, under certain circumstances.
- 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: United States, Petitioner v. Antonio J. Morrison et al. Target entity description: United States v. Morrison is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court struck down parts of the Violence Against Women Act as exceeding Congress’s powers under the Commerce Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
A.
United States v. [Accused]
"United States v. [Accused]" is the standard case caption format used in criminal prosecutions brought by the U.S. government against individual service members in the military justice system.
-
B.
United States of America v. Ulrich Greifelt, et al.
United States of America v. Ulrich Greifelt, et al. was a post–World War II Nuremberg Military Tribunal case prosecuting SS officials for racial policies, including kidnapping, Germanization, and persecution in occupied Eastern Europe.
-
C.
United States v. Eichman
United States v. Eichman is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a federal law banning flag desecration as unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.
-
D.
United States of America v. Karl Brandt et al.
United States of America v. Karl Brandt et al. was a post–World War II Nuremberg military tribunal case prosecuting Nazi physicians and officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity arising from inhumane medical experiments and the euthanasia program.
-
E.
United States v. Guest
United States v. Guest is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the federal government can prosecute private conspiracies to interfere with constitutional rights, particularly the right to travel, under certain circumstances.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
federal court case ⓘ |
| affectedProvision | civil cause of action for victims of gender-motivated violence ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
civil rights law
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ federalism in the United States ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1999-11-09 ⓘ |
| chiefJusticeAtDecision | William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| citation | 529 U.S. 598 ⓘ |
| concernsProvision | 42 U.S.C. § 13981 ⓘ |
| concernsStatute | Violence Against Women Act of 1994 ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decidedIn | October Term 1999 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2000-05-15 ⓘ |
| decisionType | constitutional law decision ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy |
David H. Souter
ⓘ
John Paul Stevens ⓘ Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 99-5 ⓘ |
| hasParty |
Antonio J. Morrison
ⓘ
Christy Brzonkala ⓘ United States of America ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| hasPetitioner |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| hasRespondent | Antonio J. Morrison ⓘ |
| holding |
Congress lacked authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to enact the civil remedy in 42 U.S.C. § 13981
ⓘ
Congress lacked authority under the Commerce Clause to enact the civil remedy in 42 U.S.C. § 13981 ⓘ the civil damages remedy in the Violence Against Women Act was unconstitutional ⓘ |
| joinedMajority |
Anthony M. Kennedy
ⓘ
Antonin Scalia ⓘ Clarence Thomas ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| language | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
ⓘ
federalism ⓘ scope of the Commerce Clause ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| originatedFrom | United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ⓘ |
| precedentFor |
limits on Congress’s Commerce Clause power
ⓘ
limits on Congress’s enforcement power under the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| relatedToCase | United States v. Lopez ⓘ |
| result | parts of the Violence Against Women Act were struck down ⓘ |
| topic |
civil remedy for victims of gender-motivated violence
ⓘ
gender-motivated violence ⓘ |
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: United States, Petitioner v. Antonio J. Morrison et al. Description of subject: United States v. Morrison is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court struck down parts of the Violence Against Women Act as exceeding Congress’s powers under the Commerce Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
United States v. Morrison
→
fullCaseName
→
United States, Petitioner v. Antonio J. Morrison et al.
ⓘ