Slaughter-House Cases

E118718

United States Supreme Court case constitutional law case landmark decision

The Slaughter-House Cases were an 1873 U.S. Supreme Court decision that narrowly interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause, significantly limiting its protection of civil rights against state infringement.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Disambiguation Statements Elicitation Referenced by

All labels observed (5)

Label	Occurrences
Slaughter-House Cases canonical	6
The Slaughter-House Cases	4
Slaughter-House Cases (related opinions)	1
United States Supreme Court decision in Slaughter-House Cases	1
opinion in The Slaughter-House Cases (dissent)	1

How this entity was disambiguated

This entity first appeared as the object of triple T998743 — 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: Slaughter-House Cases
Context triple: [Saenz v. Roe, distinguishedFrom, Slaughter-House Cases]

A. The Civil Rights Cases (1883)
The Civil Rights Cases (1883) were a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down key provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1875, severely limiting federal power to prohibit racial discrimination by private individuals and businesses.
B. Chisholm v. Georgia
Chisholm v. Georgia was a 1793 U.S. Supreme Court case that held a state could be sued in federal court by a citizen of another state, a ruling that led directly to the adoption of the Eleventh Amendment limiting such suits.
C. Cohens v. Virginia
Cohens v. Virginia is an 1821 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed the Court’s authority to review state criminal proceedings involving federal law, strengthening federal judicial power over the states.
D. Dred Scott v. Sandford
Dred Scott v. Sandford was an 1857 U.S. Supreme Court decision that infamously denied citizenship and constitutional rights to African Americans and helped accelerate tensions leading to the Civil War.
E. Gibbons v. Ogden
Gibbons v. Ogden was an 1824 U.S. Supreme Court case that broadly affirmed federal power over interstate commerce, significantly strengthening national authority relative to the states.
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: Slaughter-House Cases
Target entity description: The Slaughter-House Cases were an 1873 U.S. Supreme Court decision that narrowly interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause, significantly limiting its protection of civil rights against state infringement.

A. The Civil Rights Cases (1883)
The Civil Rights Cases (1883) were a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down key provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1875, severely limiting federal power to prohibit racial discrimination by private individuals and businesses.
B. Chisholm v. Georgia
Chisholm v. Georgia was a 1793 U.S. Supreme Court case that held a state could be sued in federal court by a citizen of another state, a ruling that led directly to the adoption of the Eleventh Amendment limiting such suits.
C. Cohens v. Virginia
Cohens v. Virginia is an 1821 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed the Court’s authority to review state criminal proceedings involving federal law, strengthening federal judicial power over the states.
D. Dred Scott v. Sandford
Dred Scott v. Sandford was an 1857 U.S. Supreme Court decision that infamously denied citizenship and constitutional rights to African Americans and helped accelerate tensions leading to the Civil War.
E. Gibbons v. Ogden
Gibbons v. Ogden was an 1824 U.S. Supreme Court case that broadly affirmed federal power over interstate commerce, significantly strengthening national authority relative to the states.
F. None of above. chosen

Statements (48)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ constitutional law case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ
background	arose from Louisiana law granting a slaughterhouse monopoly in New Orleans ⓘ butchers challenged Louisiana slaughterhouse monopoly as violating the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments ⓘ
citation	83 U.S. (16 Wall.) 36 ⓘ
constitutionalIssue	application of Fourteenth Amendment to economic regulation ⓘ scope of national versus state citizenship rights ⓘ
country	United States ⓘ linked to: United States of America
criticizedFor	adopting an overly narrow reading of the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ undermining Reconstruction-era civil rights protections ⓘ
decidedBy	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	1873 ⓘ April 14, 1873 ⓘ
dissentingOpinionBy	Joseph P. Bradley ⓘ Nathan Clifford ⓘ Noah H. Swayne ⓘ Stephen J. Field ⓘ
dissentingVote	4 ⓘ
effect	constrained use of the Fourteenth Amendment for civil rights claims ⓘ limited federal protection of civil rights against state infringement ⓘ narrowed scope of the Privileges or Immunities Clause ⓘ
hasJurisdiction	United States ⓘ linked to: United States of America
historicalContext	Reconstruction era ⓘ
holding	Fourteenth Amendment does not transfer regulation of all civil rights from the states to the federal government ⓘ Privileges or Immunities Clause protects only rights of national citizenship, not state citizenship ⓘ linked to: Privileges and Immunities Clause
interprets	Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ linked to: Fourteenth Amendment Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ linked to: Privileges and Immunities Clause
involvesClause	Privileges or Immunities Clause ⓘ linked to: Privileges and Immunities Clause
legalArea	Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ civil rights ⓘ constitutional law ⓘ
locationOfOrigin	Louisiana ⓘ New Orleans, Louisiana ⓘ linked to: New Orleans
longTermImpact	Privileges or Immunities Clause largely dormant in later Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence ⓘ shifted focus of Fourteenth Amendment litigation to Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	Samuel Freeman Miller ⓘ
majorityVote	5 ⓘ
party	Crescent City Live-Stock Landing and Slaughter-House Company ⓘ independent butchers of New Orleans ⓘ
precedentStatus	binding precedent on interpretation of Privileges or Immunities Clause ⓘ
relatedAmendment	Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ linked to: Fourteenth Amendment Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ linked to: Thirteenth Amendment
relatedClause	Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ linked to: Due Process Clause Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ linked to: Equal Protection Clause
subsequentTreatment	frequently criticized by scholars and some justices ⓘ rarely relied upon to expand civil rights protections ⓘ
timePeriod	19th century ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (13)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Saenz v. Roe → distinguishedFrom → Slaughter-House Cases ⓘ

United States v. Cruikshank → precededBy → Slaughter-House Cases ⓘ

Chase Court → notableCase → The Slaughter-House Cases ⓘ