Ocampo v. United States
E417280
Ocampo v. United States is a 1914 U.S. Supreme Court decision that applied and developed the Insular Cases framework governing constitutional rights in unincorporated American territories.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Ocampo v. United States canonical | 3 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T4158632 — 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: Ocampo v. United States Context triple: [Insular Cases doctrine, hasPart, Ocampo v. United States]
-
A.
Camfield v. United States
Camfield v. United States is an 1897 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal authority under the Property Clause to regulate the use of privately owned lands when necessary to protect adjacent public lands.
-
B.
Abrams v. United States
Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
-
C.
Yates v. United States
Yates v. United States is a 1957 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed the application of the Smith Act by distinguishing between the advocacy of abstract doctrine and the advocacy of concrete action to overthrow the government.
-
D.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
E.
Carpenter v. United States
Carpenter v. United States is a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the government generally must obtain a warrant to access historical cell phone location records under the Fourth Amendment.
- 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: Ocampo v. United States Target entity description: Ocampo v. United States is a 1914 U.S. Supreme Court decision that applied and developed the Insular Cases framework governing constitutional rights in unincorporated American territories.
-
A.
Camfield v. United States
Camfield v. United States is an 1897 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal authority under the Property Clause to regulate the use of privately owned lands when necessary to protect adjacent public lands.
-
B.
Abrams v. United States
Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
-
C.
Yates v. United States
Yates v. United States is a 1957 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed the application of the Smith Act by distinguishing between the advocacy of abstract doctrine and the advocacy of concrete action to overthrow the government.
-
D.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
E.
Carpenter v. United States
Carpenter v. United States is a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the government generally must obtain a warrant to access historical cell phone location records under the Fourth Amendment.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (33)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
federal criminal procedure case ⓘ |
| appliedDoctrine |
Insular Cases framework
ⓘ
linked to:
insular cases doctrine
territorial incorporation doctrine ⓘ |
| citation | 234 U.S. 91 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Article IV Territorial Clause of the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ |
| country |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1914 ⓘ |
| developedDoctrine | limits on extension of specific Bill of Rights guarantees to unincorporated territories ⓘ |
| held |
Congress may provide for criminal prosecutions in the Philippine Islands by information instead of grand jury indictment
ⓘ
the Fifth Amendment grand jury indictment requirement does not apply ex proprio vigore in the unincorporated territory of the Philippine Islands ⓘ the Philippine Bill of 1902 did not require grand jury indictments for criminal prosecutions in the Philippines ⓘ
linked to:
Philippine Organic Act of 1902
the constitutional guarantees applicable in unincorporated territories are limited to fundamental personal rights ⓘ |
| impact |
cited as precedent in later territorial rights cases
ⓘ
reinforced limited application of the U.S. Constitution in unincorporated territories ⓘ |
| issue | whether the federal grand jury requirement applies in the Philippine Islands ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
Philippine Islands
ONNED1
ⓘ
United States ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| languageOfDecision | English ⓘ |
| legalSubject |
Insular Cases doctrine
ⓘ
linked to:
Insular Cases
constitutional law ⓘ criminal procedure ⓘ grand jury ⓘ |
| partOf | Insular Cases ONNED1 ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
Balzac v. Porto Rico
ⓘ
Dorr v. United States ⓘ Downes v. Bidwell ⓘ |
| result | conviction in the Philippine courts was upheld ⓘ |
| territoryInvolved | Philippine Islands NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| territoryStatus | unincorporated territory of the United States ⓘ |
| timePeriod | early 20th century ⓘ |
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: Ocampo v. United States Description of subject: Ocampo v. United States is a 1914 U.S. Supreme Court decision that applied and developed the Insular Cases framework governing constitutional rights in unincorporated American territories.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.