Kimbrough v. United States
E649387
Kimbrough v. United States is a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that federal judges may deviate from the Sentencing Guidelines, particularly the crack–powder cocaine disparity, based on policy disagreements with those guidelines.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Kimbrough v. United States canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T7193356 — 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: Kimbrough v. United States Context triple: [United States v. Booker, subsequentInterpretationBy, Kimbrough v. United States]
-
A.
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.
-
B.
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.
-
C.
Yates v. United States
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.
-
D.
Bond v. United States
Bond v. United States is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified an individual’s ability to raise Tenth Amendment challenges to federal statutes, reinforcing limits on federal power in favor of state sovereignty.
-
E.
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.
- 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: Kimbrough v. United States Target entity description: Kimbrough v. United States is a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that federal judges may deviate from the Sentencing Guidelines, particularly the crack–powder cocaine disparity, based on policy disagreements with those guidelines.
-
A.
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.
-
B.
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.
-
C.
Yates v. United States
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.
-
D.
Bond v. United States
Bond v. United States is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified an individual’s ability to raise Tenth Amendment challenges to federal statutes, reinforcing limits on federal power in favor of state sovereignty.
-
E.
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.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
criminal sentencing case ⓘ |
| appliesTo | United States Sentencing Guidelines NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
federal criminal law
ⓘ
sentencing law ⓘ |
| arguedDate | October 2, 2007 ⓘ |
| category |
2007 in United States case law
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court NERFINISHED ⓘ United States Supreme Court cases on sentencing ⓘ |
| citation | 552 U.S. 85 ⓘ |
| clarified | extent of district court discretion under advisory Sentencing Guidelines ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Antonin Scalia
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decidedDate | December 10, 2007 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2007 ⓘ |
| dissentBy |
Anthony M. Kennedy
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Antonin Scalia NERFINISHED ⓘ Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED ⓘ Samuel A. Alito, Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 06-6330 ⓘ |
| effect |
increased judicial discretion to vary from crack cocaine guideline ranges
ⓘ
recognized that the Sentencing Commission’s crack–powder ratio was not based on empirical data in the same way as other Guidelines ⓘ |
| fullCaseName | Derrick Kimbrough v. United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holding |
A sentencing judge may impose a sentence outside the Guidelines range because the judge disagrees with the crack–powder cocaine sentencing disparity embodied in the Guidelines.
ⓘ
Federal district courts may deviate from the United States Sentencing Guidelines based on policy disagreements with the Guidelines. ⓘ The crack–powder cocaine ratio in the Sentencing Guidelines is advisory, not mandatory. ⓘ |
| influenced | later reforms to federal crack cocaine sentencing policy ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Anthony M. Kennedy
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ David H. Souter NERFINISHED ⓘ John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED ⓘ Samuel A. Alito, Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | United States federal courts NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
crack–powder cocaine sentencing disparity
ⓘ
federal sentencing discretion ⓘ interpretation of advisory Sentencing Guidelines after United States v. Booker ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Ruth Bader Ginsburg NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| priorHistory | United States v. Kimbrough, 174 F. App’x 798 (4th Cir. 2006) NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| recognized | district courts may consider the disparity between the Guidelines’ treatment of crack and powder cocaine offenses when imposing sentence ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Gall v. United States
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
United States v. Booker NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| standardOfReview | reasonableness review for sentences outside the Guidelines range ⓘ |
| subsequentCitationBy | federal appellate courts reviewing crack cocaine sentences ⓘ |
| topic |
crack cocaine sentencing
ⓘ
policy-based variances from Guidelines ⓘ |
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: Kimbrough v. United States Description of subject: Kimbrough v. United States is a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that federal judges may deviate from the Sentencing Guidelines, particularly the crack–powder cocaine disparity, based on policy disagreements with those guidelines.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.