Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins
E31057
Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that established that employment decisions based on gender stereotyping violate federal anti-discrimination law and clarified the burden-shifting framework for mixed-motive discrimination claims.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins canonical | 10 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T243141 — 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: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins Context triple: [Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, landmarkCase, Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins]
-
A.
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.
-
B.
Hines v. Davidowitz
Hines v. Davidowitz is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that held federal law preempts conflicting state alien-registration laws under the Supremacy Clause.
-
C.
Sherbert v. Verner
Sherbert v. Verner is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case that strengthened protections for religious liberty by requiring strict scrutiny of government actions that substantially burden individuals’ religious practices.
-
D.
United States v. Comstock
United States v. Comstock is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s authority to civilly commit mentally ill, sexually dangerous federal prisoners beyond their release date under the Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause.
-
E.
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.
- 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: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins Target entity description: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that established that employment decisions based on gender stereotyping violate federal anti-discrimination law and clarified the burden-shifting framework for mixed-motive discrimination claims.
-
A.
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.
-
B.
Hines v. Davidowitz
Hines v. Davidowitz is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that held federal law preempts conflicting state alien-registration laws under the Supremacy Clause.
-
C.
Sherbert v. Verner
Sherbert v. Verner is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case that strengthened protections for religious liberty by requiring strict scrutiny of government actions that substantially burden individuals’ religious practices.
-
D.
United States v. Comstock
United States v. Comstock is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s authority to civilly commit mentally ill, sexually dangerous federal prisoners beyond their release date under the Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause.
-
E.
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.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Title VII case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ employment discrimination case ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1988-10-31 ⓘ |
| citation | 490 U.S. 228 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Antonin Scalia
ⓘ
Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ John Paul Stevens ⓘ Sandra Day O'Connor ⓘ
linked to:
Sandra Day O’Connor
|
| country |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1989-05-01 ⓘ |
| defendant | Price Waterhouse ⓘ |
| dissentBy |
Anthony M. Kennedy
ⓘ
Byron R. White ⓘ Sandra Day O'Connor ⓘ
linked to:
Sandra Day O’Connor
William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 87-1167 ⓘ |
| employerBurdenStandard | preponderance of the evidence ⓘ |
| fullName | Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins ⓘ |
| genderStereotypingRecognizedAs | evidence of sex discrimination ⓘ |
| holding |
Employment decisions based on gender stereotyping violate Title VII
ⓘ
In mixed-motive cases under Title VII, once a plaintiff shows that discrimination was a motivating factor, the burden shifts to the employer to prove it would have made the same decision absent the discriminatory motive ⓘ |
| influenced | Civil Rights Act of 1991 ⓘ |
| issue |
allocation of burdens of proof in mixed-motive discrimination cases
ⓘ
whether sex stereotyping constitutes sex discrimination under Title VII ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| legalArea |
anti-discrimination law
ⓘ
civil rights law ⓘ employment law ⓘ |
| legalPrinciple |
gender stereotyping is a form of sex discrimination
ⓘ
mixed-motive burden-shifting framework under Title VII ⓘ |
| lowerCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| plaintiff | Ann Hopkins ⓘ |
| plaintiffBurdenStandard | show that discrimination was a motivating factor in the employment decision ⓘ |
| pluralityOpinionBy | William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| precedentFor |
mixed-motive discrimination analysis under Title VII
ⓘ
recognition of gender stereotyping as actionable discrimination ⓘ |
| rearguedDate | 1989-03-01 ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
burden shifting
ⓘ
gender stereotyping ⓘ mixed-motive framework ⓘ |
| result | judgment vacated and case remanded ⓘ |
| shortName | Price Waterhouse ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted | Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ⓘ |
| voteSplit | 6-3 on liability issues ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1989 ⓘ |
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: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins Description of subject: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that established that employment decisions based on gender stereotyping violate federal anti-discrimination law and clarified the burden-shifting framework for mixed-motive discrimination claims.
Referenced by (10)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.