Planned Parenthood v. Abbott
E464152
Planned Parenthood v. Abbott is a 2013 federal court case in which abortion providers challenged Texas restrictions that imposed stringent requirements on abortion clinics and physicians, arguing they placed an undue burden on women seeking abortions.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Planned Parenthood v. Abbott canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T4673207 — 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: Planned Parenthood v. Abbott Context triple: [Texas abortion laws, centralToCase, Planned Parenthood v. Abbott]
-
A.
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt is a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down Texas abortion restrictions as imposing an undue burden on women’s constitutional right to access abortion.
-
B.
Stenberg v. Carhart
Stenberg v. Carhart is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a Nebraska law banning so-called “partial-birth abortion” as unconstitutional for lacking a health exception for the mother and imposing an undue burden on abortion access.
-
C.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
Planned Parenthood v. Casey is a landmark 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reaffirmed the constitutional right to abortion while allowing greater state regulation under the “undue burden” standard.
-
D.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the federal constitutional right to abortion.
-
E.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that closely held for-profit corporations can claim religious exemptions from certain federal regulations under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
- 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: Planned Parenthood v. Abbott Target entity description: Planned Parenthood v. Abbott is a 2013 federal court case in which abortion providers challenged Texas restrictions that imposed stringent requirements on abortion clinics and physicians, arguing they placed an undue burden on women seeking abortions.
-
A.
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt is a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down Texas abortion restrictions as imposing an undue burden on women’s constitutional right to access abortion.
-
B.
Stenberg v. Carhart
Stenberg v. Carhart is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a Nebraska law banning so-called “partial-birth abortion” as unconstitutional for lacking a health exception for the mother and imposing an undue burden on abortion access.
-
C.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
Planned Parenthood v. Casey is a landmark 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reaffirmed the constitutional right to abortion while allowing greater state regulation under the “undue burden” standard.
-
D.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the federal constitutional right to abortion.
-
E.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that closely held for-profit corporations can claim religious exemptions from certain federal regulations under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States constitutional law case
ⓘ
abortion-related legal case ⓘ federal court case ⓘ |
| appealedTo | United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
abortion law
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ health law ⓘ |
| argumentByPlaintiffs |
challenged provisions impose an undue burden on women seeking abortions
ⓘ
challenged provisions would cause clinic closures ⓘ challenged provisions would reduce access to abortion services in Texas ⓘ |
| challenges |
Texas abortion restrictions enacted in 2013
ⓘ
requirement that abortion providers have admitting privileges at a hospital within a specified distance ⓘ restrictions on medication abortion (abortion-inducing drugs) ⓘ |
| citation | 734 F.3d 406 ⓘ |
| concerns |
access to abortion services in Texas
ⓘ
regulation of abortion clinics and physicians ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInvoked | Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | United States District Court for the Western District of Texas NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2013 ⓘ |
| defendant | Greg Abbott NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| defendantOffice | Attorney General of Texas NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| geographicScope | State of Texas NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasJurisdiction | United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| involves |
state regulation of medical practice
ⓘ
women's reproductive rights ⓘ |
| language | English ⓘ |
| legalDoctrine | substantive due process ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
abortion clinic regulation
ⓘ
medication abortion regulation ⓘ physician admitting privileges requirement ⓘ undue burden standard ⓘ |
| partyTypeDefendant | state officials ⓘ |
| partyTypePlaintiff | abortion providers ⓘ |
| plaintiff |
Planned Parenthood
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
other abortion providers in Texas ⓘ |
| proceduralPosture | challenge to enforcement of newly enacted abortion regulations ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| standardApplied | undue burden test from Planned Parenthood v. Casey ⓘ |
| stateInvolved | Texas NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| statuteInvolved | Texas House Bill 2 (2013) NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | constitutionality of Texas House Bill 2 provisions ⓘ |
| timePeriod | post-Roe v. Wade abortion litigation era ⓘ |
| typeOfRestrictionChallenged |
admitting privileges requirement for physicians performing abortions
ⓘ
limitations on use of abortion-inducing drugs ⓘ |
| year | 2013 ⓘ |
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: Planned Parenthood v. Abbott Description of subject: Planned Parenthood v. Abbott is a 2013 federal court case in which abortion providers challenged Texas restrictions that imposed stringent requirements on abortion clinics and physicians, arguing they placed an undue burden on women seeking abortions.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.