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: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke | Statement: [Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, limitedPrecedent, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke]

Target entity: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
Context triple: [Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, limitedPrecedent, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke]

• A. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke chosen
  Regents of the University of California v. Bakke is a landmark 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down rigid racial quotas in university admissions while upholding the constitutionality of using race as one factor among many to foster diversity.
• B. Grutter v. Bollinger
  Grutter v. Bollinger is a landmark 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the limited use of race as one factor in holistic law school admissions to promote educational diversity.
• C. Gratz v. Bollinger
  Gratz v. Bollinger is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down the University of Michigan’s undergraduate affirmative action admissions policy as violating the Equal Protection Clause by awarding automatic points based on race.
• D. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents
  McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents is a 1950 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down racial segregation within a public university’s graduate program, marking an important step toward the desegregation of higher education.
• E. Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College
  Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College is a landmark 2023 U.S. Supreme Court case that sharply limited the use of race-conscious admissions policies in higher education, effectively ending affirmative action programs at colleges and universities nationwide.
• F. None of above.
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

Target predicate: limitedPrecedent
Context triple: [Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, limitedPrecedent, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke]

• A. legalPrecedentInvolved
  Indicates that a particular legal precedent (prior court decision or ruling) is relevant to, cited in, or forms the basis for the current legal matter or action.
• B. limitedByCourtCase chosen
  Indicates that one entity’s scope, effect, or applicability is restricted or constrained as a result of a specific court case or legal proceeding.
• C. hasCourtPrecedence
  Indicates that one court decision or ruling holds authoritative priority over another in legal reasoning or application.
• D. typicalPrecedent
  Indicates that one situation, case, or event serves as a standard or commonly followed example for how similar later situations are handled.
• E. precedentInterpreted
  Indicates that one legal precedent is interpreted or understood in a particular way, often as clarified or applied in subsequent decisions or analyses.
• F. None of above.