Camfield v. United States
E262094
Camfield v. United States is an 1897 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal authority under the Property Clause to regulate the use of privately owned lands when necessary to protect adjacent public lands.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Camfield v. United States canonical | 3 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T2393441 — 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: Camfield v. United States Context triple: [Property Clause, citedIn, Camfield v. United States]
-
A.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
B.
Abrams v. United States
Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
-
C.
Carpenter v. United States
Carpenter v. United States is a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the government generally must obtain a warrant to access historical cell phone location records under the Fourth Amendment.
-
D.
Dennis v. United States
Dennis v. United States is a landmark 1951 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the convictions of Communist Party leaders under the Smith Act, significantly shaping First Amendment jurisprudence on speech advocating the overthrow of the government.
-
E.
Corfield v. Coryell
Corfield v. Coryell is an 1823 federal circuit court decision by Justice Bushrod Washington that famously articulated an influential early list of the fundamental rights protected by the U.S. Constitution’s Privileges and Immunities 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: Camfield v. United States Target entity description: Camfield v. United States is an 1897 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal authority under the Property Clause to regulate the use of privately owned lands when necessary to protect adjacent public lands.
-
A.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
B.
Abrams v. United States
Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
-
C.
Carpenter v. United States
Carpenter v. United States is a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the government generally must obtain a warrant to access historical cell phone location records under the Fourth Amendment.
-
D.
Dennis v. United States
Dennis v. United States is a landmark 1951 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the convictions of Communist Party leaders under the Smith Act, significantly shaping First Amendment jurisprudence on speech advocating the overthrow of the government.
-
E.
Corfield v. Coryell
Corfield v. Coryell is an 1823 federal circuit court decision by Justice Bushrod Washington that famously articulated an influential early list of the fundamental rights protected by the U.S. Constitution’s Privileges and Immunities Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (33)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
land use case ⓘ public lands case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
federal power ⓘ public land law ⓘ |
| citation | 167 U.S. 518 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution
Property Clause ⓘ
surface form:
Property Clause of the U.S. Constitution
|
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1897 ⓘ |
| governmentalBodyInvolved |
United States Congress
ⓘ
surface form:
Congress of the United States
|
| holding |
United States public land law
ⓘ
surface form:
Congress may regulate the use of privately owned lands when necessary to protect adjacent public lands under the Property Clause
|
| impact | strengthened federal control over the use and protection of public lands ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| language | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
federal regulation of private land to protect public land
ⓘ
police power over public lands ⓘ scope of the Property Clause ⓘ |
| partOf | United States Supreme Court jurisprudence on the Property Clause ⓘ |
| precedentFor |
broad federal authority over public lands
ⓘ
federal regulation of activities on private land affecting federal property ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Kleppe v. New Mexico
ⓘ
Light v. United States ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
Property Clause power
ⓘ
federal police power over public lands ⓘ public land management ⓘ |
| result | federal authority to regulate private land use near public lands was upheld ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | regulation of fencing and enclosure affecting public lands ⓘ |
| timePeriod | 19th century United States jurisprudence ⓘ |
| typeOfDecision | majority opinion ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1897 ⓘ |
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: Camfield v. United States Description of subject: Camfield v. United States is an 1897 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal authority under the Property Clause to regulate the use of privately owned lands when necessary to protect adjacent public lands.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.