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: Reynolds v. Sims | Statement: [Avery v. Midland County, extendsDoctrineFrom, Reynolds v. Sims]

Target entity: Reynolds v. Sims
Context triple: [Avery v. Midland County, extendsDoctrineFrom, Reynolds v. Sims]

• A. Reynolds v. Sims decision chosen
  The Reynolds v. Sims decision is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that established the “one person, one vote” principle by requiring state legislative districts to be roughly equal in population under the Equal Protection Clause.
• B. Baker v. Carr
  Baker v. Carr is a landmark 1962 U.S. Supreme Court case that established federal courts’ authority to hear legislative redistricting disputes under the Equal Protection Clause, paving the way for the “one person, one vote” principle.
• C. Wesberry v. Sanders
  Wesberry v. Sanders is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle that congressional districts must be drawn so that each person's vote is as equal in weight as practicable, laying groundwork for the "one person, one vote" standard.
• D. South Carolina v. Katzenbach
  South Carolina v. Katzenbach is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, affirming broad federal power to combat racial discrimination in voting.
• E. Shaw v. Reno
  Shaw v. Reno is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited the use of race in legislative redistricting by holding that bizarrely shaped, race-based districts can violate the Constitution.
• F. None of above.
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

Target predicate: extendsDoctrineFrom
Context triple: [Avery v. Midland County, extendsDoctrineFrom, Reynolds v. Sims]

• A. definedDoctrineAt
  Indicates that a particular doctrine was formally established, articulated, or codified at a specific place or time.
• B. usesDoctrine
  Indicates that one entity applies, follows, or relies on a particular doctrine in its actions or reasoning.
• C. sharesDoctrine
  Indicates that two entities adhere to or promote the same doctrine, belief system, or set of principles.
• D. createdDoctrine
  Indicates that an entity originated, formulated, or established a particular doctrine, theory, or set of principles.
• E. replacedByDoctrine
  Indicates that one doctrine has been superseded and taken its place by another doctrine.
• F. None of above. chosen