Yates v. United States
E276463
Yates v. United States is a 1957 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed the application of the Smith Act by distinguishing between the advocacy of abstract doctrine and the advocacy of concrete action to overthrow the government.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Yates v. United States canonical | 4 |
| Yates et al. v. United States | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T2533082 — 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: Yates v. United States Context triple: [Smith Act, notableCase, Yates 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.
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.
-
C.
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.
-
D.
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.
-
E.
Supreme Court case Yakus v. United States
Yakus v. United States is a 1944 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld wartime price controls and affirmed broad congressional delegation of authority to administrative agencies.
- 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: Yates v. United States Target entity description: Yates v. United States is a 1957 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed the application of the Smith Act by distinguishing between the advocacy of abstract doctrine and the advocacy of concrete action to overthrow the government.
-
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.
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.
-
C.
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.
-
D.
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.
-
E.
Supreme Court case Yakus v. United States
Yakus v. United States is a 1944 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld wartime price controls and affirmed broad congressional delegation of authority to administrative agencies.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (54)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Cold War era case
ⓘ
First Amendment case ⓘ United States Supreme Court case ⓘ criminal law case ⓘ |
| arguedDate |
October 8, 1956
ⓘ
October 9, 1956 ⓘ |
| charge | conspiracy to advocate the overthrow of the U.S. government by force and violence ⓘ |
| citation | 354 U.S. 298 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Hugo L. Black
ⓘ
William O. Douglas ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Due Process Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment
First Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | June 17, 1957 ⓘ |
| dissentBy |
Charles E. Whittaker
ⓘ
Felix Frankfurter ⓘ John M. Harlan II ⓘ Tom C. Clark ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 6 ⓘ |
| fullName |
Yates v. United States
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Yates et al. v. United States
|
| holding |
Smith Act
ⓘ
surface form:
The Smith Act applies only to advocacy of concrete action to overthrow the government
The Smith Act does not prohibit advocacy of abstract doctrine advocating violent overthrow of the government ⓘ The convictions of the petitioners under the Smith Act were reversed or remanded ⓘ |
| impact |
contributed to the decline of Smith Act prosecutions
ⓘ
marked a shift toward greater protection of radical political speech ⓘ significantly limited the federal government’s ability to prosecute Communist Party members under the Smith Act ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Charles E. Whittaker
ⓘ
Earl Warren ⓘ Harold H. Burton ⓘ Hugo L. Black ⓘ Tom C. Clark ⓘ William O. Douglas ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal criminal law ⓘ |
| keyPrinciple |
distinction between advocacy of abstract doctrine and advocacy of action
ⓘ
narrow construction of statutes that restrict speech ⓘ protection of political advocacy under the First Amendment ⓘ |
| legalSubject |
Smith Act
ⓘ
advocacy of overthrow of government ⓘ freedom of speech ⓘ subversive activities ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy |
John M. Harlan II
ⓘ
surface form:
John Marshall Harlan II
|
| overruledInPart |
Dennis v. United States
ⓘ
surface form:
Dennis v. United States (to the extent Dennis allowed broader application of the Smith Act)
|
| parties |
Oleta O’Connor Yates
ⓘ
United States of America ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
Brandenburg v. Ohio
ⓘ
Dennis v. United States ⓘ Gitlow v. New York ⓘ Smith Act ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| timePeriod | McCarthy era ⓘ |
| topic |
Communist Party USA
ⓘ
surface form:
Communist Party of the United States
|
| volume | 354 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1957 ⓘ |
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: Yates v. United States Description of subject: Yates v. United States is a 1957 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed the application of the Smith Act by distinguishing between the advocacy of abstract doctrine and the advocacy of concrete action to overthrow the government.
Referenced by (5)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Yates et al. v. United States