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: No. 16-476 | Statement: [The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act’s provisions prohibiting state authorization of sports gambling schemes violate the anti-commandeering rule of the Tenth Amendment, SupremeCourtDocketNumber, No. 16-476]

Target entity: No. 16-476
Context triple: [The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act’s provisions prohibiting state authorization of sports gambling schemes violate the anti-commandeering rule of the Tenth Amendment, SupremeCourtDocketNumber, No. 16-476]

• A. Rassmussen v. United States
  Rassmussen v. United States is a 1905 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the Insular Cases framework to determine the constitutional rights available in newly acquired U.S. territories.
• B. National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan
  National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified the time limits for filing employment discrimination claims, distinguishing between discrete acts and continuing violations under Title VII.
• C. 424 U.S. 351
  424 U.S. 351 is the official United States Reports citation for the Supreme Court case De Canas v. Bica (1976), which addressed the extent of state authority over the employment of unauthorized immigrants.
• D. United States v. Bajakajian
  United States v. Bajakajian is a 1998 U.S. Supreme Court case that held, for the first time, that a criminal forfeiture could violate the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause if it is grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the offense.
• E. Frank v. Mangum
  Frank v. Mangum is a 1915 U.S. Supreme Court decision addressing whether mob-dominated criminal trials violate due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.
• F. None of above. chosen
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

Generate a one-sentence description of the target entity. 
You are given a context triple in the form (subject, predicate, object), where the object is the target entity. 
# Instructions
Use the triple to infer relevant information about the entity. Describe the entity based on what is most defining, well-known. 
Avoid repeating the information from the triple, unless really essential.
# Response Format
Return only the sentence: "Description: [one-sentence description of the target entity]"

Entity: No. 16-476
Triple: [The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act’s provisions prohibiting state authorization of sports gambling schemes violate the anti-commandeering rule of the Tenth Amendment, SupremeCourtDocketNumber, No. 16-476]

No. 16-476 is the U.S. Supreme Court docket number for the case in which the Court struck down key provisions of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) as unconstitutional under the Tenth Amendment’s anti-commandeering doctrine.

Target entity: No. 16-476
Target entity description: No. 16-476 is the U.S. Supreme Court docket number for the case in which the Court struck down key provisions of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) as unconstitutional under the Tenth Amendment’s anti-commandeering doctrine.

• A. Rassmussen v. United States
  Rassmussen v. United States is a 1905 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the Insular Cases framework to determine the constitutional rights available in newly acquired U.S. territories.
• B. National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan
  National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified the time limits for filing employment discrimination claims, distinguishing between discrete acts and continuing violations under Title VII.
• C. 424 U.S. 351
  424 U.S. 351 is the official United States Reports citation for the Supreme Court case De Canas v. Bica (1976), which addressed the extent of state authority over the employment of unauthorized immigrants.
• D. United States v. Bajakajian
  United States v. Bajakajian is a 1998 U.S. Supreme Court case that held, for the first time, that a criminal forfeiture could violate the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause if it is grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the offense.
• E. Frank v. Mangum
  Frank v. Mangum is a 1915 U.S. Supreme Court decision addressing whether mob-dominated criminal trials violate due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.
• F. None of above. chosen

Target predicate: SupremeCourtDocketNumber
Context triple: [The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act’s provisions prohibiting state authorization of sports gambling schemes violate the anti-commandeering rule of the Tenth Amendment, SupremeCourtDocketNumber, No. 16-476]

• A. courtNumber
  Indicates the specific numbered court (e.g., field, room, or venue) assigned or associated with an event, case, or match.
• B. nrcDocketNumber
  Indicates the formal docket or case number assigned by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to track and reference a specific regulatory action or proceeding.
• C. tribunalNumber
  Indicates the identifying number assigned to a specific tribunal within a legal or administrative system.
• D. yearArguedBeforeSupremeCourt
  Indicates the specific year in which a case was argued before the Supreme Court.
• E. confirmedToSupremeCourtOn
  Indicates that an individual was officially approved and appointed to serve on the Supreme Court on a specific date.
• F. None of above. chosen