Triple

Given a phrase, classify it is english named entity (e.g., persons, organizations, works of art) in Latin script, or not (e.g., literals, dates, URLs, verbose phrases). For disambiguation, the statement where the phrase occurs as object is also given. Please return a JSON object with `phrase` (string, the phrase being analyzed) and `is_ne` (boolean, indicating whether the phrase is a Named Entity).

Phrase: Lee v. Weisman (1992) U.S. Supreme Court decision | Statement: [Daniel Weisman, hasNotableCourtDecision, Lee v. Weisman (1992) U.S. Supreme Court decision]

Target entity: Lee v. Weisman (1992) U.S. Supreme Court decision
Context triple: [Daniel Weisman, hasNotableCourtDecision, Lee v. Weisman (1992) U.S. Supreme Court decision]

• A. Lee v. Weisman chosen
  Lee v. Weisman is a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held clergy-led prayer at public school graduation ceremonies unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.
• B. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier
  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier is a 1988 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited student First Amendment rights by allowing public school officials greater authority to regulate school-sponsored student speech, such as in school newspapers.
• C. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
  Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court case that established students do not lose their First Amendment free speech rights at school, so long as their expression does not substantially disrupt the educational environment.
• D. Board of Education v. Pico
  Board of Education v. Pico is a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case in which a divided Court held that public school boards may not remove books from school libraries simply because they dislike the ideas contained in them, recognizing students’ limited First Amendment right to receive information.
• E. Everson v. Board of Education
  Everson v. Board of Education is a 1947 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause to the states and articulated the modern “wall of separation between church and state” doctrine.
• F. None of above.
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

Target predicate: hasNotableCourtDecision
Context triple: [Daniel Weisman, hasNotableCourtDecision, Lee v. Weisman (1992) U.S. Supreme Court decision]

• A. hasNotableDecision chosen
  Indicates that an entity is associated with a specific decision that is considered significant or noteworthy in some context.
• B. hasNotableJudge
  Indicates that an entity is associated with a judge who is distinguished, prominent, or otherwise notable in some recognized way.
• C. hasLowerCourtDecision
  Indicates that a higher court case is associated with, or results from, a specific decision made by a lower court.
• D. notableSupremeCourtCase
  Indicates that a legal case is recognized as a significant or influential decision by the Supreme Court.
• E. notableCourt
  Indicates that a particular court is especially significant or noteworthy in relation to the subject.
• F. None of above.