Shapiro v. Thompson
E118716
Shapiro v. Thompson is a landmark 1969 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down state laws imposing durational residency requirements for welfare benefits as violations of the constitutional right to travel and equal protection.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Shapiro v. Thompson canonical | 6 |
| Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T998741 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Shapiro v. Thompson Context triple: [Saenz v. Roe, followedPrecedent, Shapiro v. Thompson]
-
A.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
B.
Chiafalo v. Washington
Chiafalo v. Washington is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that unanimously upheld states’ authority to penalize or replace “faithless electors” who do not vote in line with their state’s popular vote in presidential elections.
-
C.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
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.
Milliken v. Bradley
Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by ruling that courts could not impose cross-district busing plans absent proof of interdistrict segregation.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Shapiro v. Thompson Target entity description: Shapiro v. Thompson is a landmark 1969 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down state laws imposing durational residency requirements for welfare benefits as violations of the constitutional right to travel and equal protection.
-
A.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
B.
Chiafalo v. Washington
Chiafalo v. Washington is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that unanimously upheld states’ authority to penalize or replace “faithless electors” who do not vote in line with their state’s popular vote in presidential elections.
-
C.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
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.
Milliken v. Bradley
Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by ruling that courts could not impose cross-district busing plans absent proof of interdistrict segregation.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ landmark case ⓘ right-to-travel case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
civil rights
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ welfare law ⓘ |
| challengedLaw | one-year residency requirement for welfare benefits ⓘ |
| citation | 394 U.S. 618 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Equal Protection Clause
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
linked to:
Fourteenth Amendment
|
| country |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1969-04-21 ⓘ |
| defendant | Abraham D. Shapiro ⓘ |
| dissentingJustices |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
Hugo L. Black ⓘ John M. Harlan II ⓘ |
| fullName | Shapiro v. Thompson ⓘ |
| holding |
State durational residency requirements for welfare assistance violate the Equal Protection Clause.
ⓘ
State durational residency requirements for welfare assistance violate the constitutional right to travel. ⓘ |
| impact |
influenced later right-to-travel jurisprudence
ⓘ
limited states’ ability to condition welfare benefits on durational residency ⓘ strengthened constitutional protection for the right to interstate travel ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
ⓘ
linked to:
Equal Protection Clause
constitutional right to travel ⓘ durational residency requirements for welfare benefits ⓘ |
| majorityJustices |
Abe Fortas
ⓘ
Earl Warren ⓘ Potter Stewart ⓘ Thurgood Marshall ⓘ William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ William O. Douglas ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| plaintiff | Vivian Marie Thompson ⓘ |
| recognizedRight |
fundamental right to travel between states
ⓘ
right of interstate migration ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Edwards v. California
ⓘ
Saenz v. Roe ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
fundamental rights
ⓘ
interstate migration ⓘ |
| standardOfReview | strict scrutiny ⓘ |
| stateInvolved |
Connecticut
ⓘ
District of Columbia ⓘ Pennsylvania ⓘ |
| voteSplit | 6-3 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1969 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Shapiro v. Thompson Description of subject: Shapiro v. Thompson is a landmark 1969 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down state laws imposing durational residency requirements for welfare benefits as violations of the constitutional right to travel and equal protection.
Referenced by (7)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
linked to: Shapiro v. Thompson