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: Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs | Statement: [Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, interpretedByCase, Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs]

Target entity: Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs
Context triple: [Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, interpretedByCase, Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs]

• A. South Dakota v. Dole
  South Dakota v. Dole is a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power to condition federal highway funds on states adopting a minimum drinking age of 21, helping define the scope of the federal spending power.
• B. National League of Cities v. Usery
  National League of Cities v. Usery was a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that temporarily limited Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause by holding that federal wage and hour regulations could not be applied to traditional state government functions.
• C. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
  Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the standards for proving employment discrimination under Title VII, prompting Congress to later revise those standards in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
• D. Ex parte Young
  Ex parte Young is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court decision that created a legal fiction allowing suits in federal court against state officials to stop ongoing violations of federal law, despite state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.
• E. Timbs v. Indiana
  Timbs v. Indiana is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause applies to the states through 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: Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs
Triple: [Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, interpretedByCase, Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs]

Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power to subject states to damages suits under the Family and Medical Leave Act as a valid exercise of its enforcement authority under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Target entity: Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs
Target entity description: Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power to subject states to damages suits under the Family and Medical Leave Act as a valid exercise of its enforcement authority under the Fourteenth Amendment.

• A. South Dakota v. Dole
  South Dakota v. Dole is a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power to condition federal highway funds on states adopting a minimum drinking age of 21, helping define the scope of the federal spending power.
• B. National League of Cities v. Usery
  National League of Cities v. Usery was a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that temporarily limited Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause by holding that federal wage and hour regulations could not be applied to traditional state government functions.
• C. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
  Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the standards for proving employment discrimination under Title VII, prompting Congress to later revise those standards in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
• D. Ex parte Young
  Ex parte Young is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court decision that created a legal fiction allowing suits in federal court against state officials to stop ongoing violations of federal law, despite state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.
• E. Timbs v. Indiana
  Timbs v. Indiana is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
• F. None of above. chosen