Fletcher v. Peck
E285911
Contract Clause case
United States Supreme Court case
case on judicial review of state laws
constitutional law case
landmark decision
Fletcher v. Peck was an 1810 U.S. Supreme Court decision that for the first time struck down a state law as unconstitutional, helping define the scope of the Contract Clause and judicial review over state legislation.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Fletcher v. Peck canonical | 5 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T2652820 — 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: Fletcher v. Peck Context triple: [Contract Clause, hasKeyCase, Fletcher v. Peck]
-
A.
Chisholm v. Georgia
Chisholm v. Georgia was a 1793 U.S. Supreme Court case that held a state could be sued in federal court by a citizen of another state, a ruling that led directly to the adoption of the Eleventh Amendment limiting such suits.
-
B.
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia was an 1831 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Cherokee Nation was a "domestic dependent nation" lacking standing to sue as a foreign nation, a ruling that shaped federal Indian law and the context of Indian Removal.
-
C.
Jackson v. Georgia
Jackson v. Georgia is a United States Supreme Court case that, alongside Furman v. Georgia, addressed the constitutionality and application of the death penalty under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
-
D.
Worcester v. Georgia
Worcester v. Georgia was an 1832 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that states had no authority to impose laws on Native American tribal lands, affirming tribal sovereignty in the face of federal Indian Removal policies.
-
E.
Gibbons v. Ogden
Gibbons v. Ogden was an 1824 U.S. Supreme Court case that broadly affirmed federal power over interstate commerce, significantly strengthening national authority relative to the states.
- 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: Fletcher v. Peck Target entity description: Fletcher v. Peck was an 1810 U.S. Supreme Court decision that for the first time struck down a state law as unconstitutional, helping define the scope of the Contract Clause and judicial review over state legislation.
-
A.
Chisholm v. Georgia
Chisholm v. Georgia was a 1793 U.S. Supreme Court case that held a state could be sued in federal court by a citizen of another state, a ruling that led directly to the adoption of the Eleventh Amendment limiting such suits.
-
B.
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia was an 1831 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Cherokee Nation was a "domestic dependent nation" lacking standing to sue as a foreign nation, a ruling that shaped federal Indian law and the context of Indian Removal.
-
C.
Jackson v. Georgia
Jackson v. Georgia is a United States Supreme Court case that, alongside Furman v. Georgia, addressed the constitutionality and application of the death penalty under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
-
D.
Worcester v. Georgia
Worcester v. Georgia was an 1832 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that states had no authority to impose laws on Native American tribal lands, affirming tribal sovereignty in the face of federal Indian Removal policies.
-
E.
Gibbons v. Ogden
Gibbons v. Ogden was an 1824 U.S. Supreme Court case that broadly affirmed federal power over interstate commerce, significantly strengthening national authority relative to the states.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Contract Clause case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ case on judicial review of state laws ⓘ constitutional law case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| aroseFrom | Yazoo land scandal ⓘ |
| era | Marshall Court ⓘ |
| hasAreaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
contracts ⓘ property law ⓘ |
| hasChiefJustice | John Marshall ⓘ |
| hasCitation |
10 U.S. 87
ⓘ
6 Cranch 87 ⓘ |
| hasConstitutionalProvision |
Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution
Contract Clause ⓘ |
| hasCountry |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| hasDateDecided | 1810 ⓘ |
| hasJurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| hasLegalDoctrine |
judicial review of state legislation
ⓘ
non-impairment of contracts ⓘ protection of vested rights ⓘ |
| hasMajorityOpinionBy | John Marshall ⓘ |
| hasOutcome |
Georgia rescinding statute held unconstitutional
ⓘ
land grants under the original statute upheld as valid ⓘ |
| hasParties |
John Peck
ⓘ
Robert Fletcher ⓘ |
| hasProceduralPosture | writ of error to a state court ⓘ |
| hasStateInvolved | Georgia ⓘ |
| hasSubjectMatter |
constitutionality of state statutes
ⓘ
state land grant contracts ⓘ |
| holds |
a grant by a state legislature can be a contract protected by the Contract Clause
ⓘ
a state cannot pass a law that impairs the obligation of contracts ⓘ subsequent legislatures cannot invalidate earlier lawful grants by declaring them void ⓘ |
| involves |
Georgia land grants
ⓘ
contract rights ⓘ judicial review ⓘ retroactive legislation ⓘ separation of powers ⓘ state legislative power ⓘ vested rights ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
Contract Clause jurisprudence
ⓘ
Dartmouth College v. Woodward ⓘ Marbury v. Madison ⓘ |
| significance |
expanded judicial review to state legislation
ⓘ
first time the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a state law as unconstitutional ⓘ helped define the scope of the Contract Clause ⓘ strengthened protection of property and contract rights against state interference ⓘ |
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: Fletcher v. Peck Description of subject: Fletcher v. Peck was an 1810 U.S. Supreme Court decision that for the first time struck down a state law as unconstitutional, helping define the scope of the Contract Clause and judicial review over state legislation.
Referenced by (5)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.