Palko v. Connecticut
E54706
United States Supreme Court case
constitutional law case
criminal law case
selective incorporation case
Palko v. Connecticut is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that helped define the doctrine of selective incorporation by holding that only certain fundamental rights in the Bill of Rights apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Palko v. Connecticut canonical | 9 |
| Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 (1937) | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T434617 — 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: Palko v. Connecticut Context triple: [Due Process Clause, interpretedInCase, Palko v. Connecticut]
-
A.
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Cantwell v. Connecticut is a 1940 U.S. Supreme Court case that first applied the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause to the states, striking down a state law that improperly restricted religious proselytizing.
-
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.
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.
-
D.
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.
-
E.
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.
- 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: Palko v. Connecticut Target entity description: Palko v. Connecticut is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that helped define the doctrine of selective incorporation by holding that only certain fundamental rights in the Bill of Rights apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
A.
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Cantwell v. Connecticut is a 1940 U.S. Supreme Court case that first applied the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause to the states, striking down a state law that improperly restricted religious proselytizing.
-
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.
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.
-
D.
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.
-
E.
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.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (53)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ criminal law case ⓘ selective incorporation case ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1937-10-12 ⓘ |
| citation | 302 U.S. 319 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
ⓘ
linked to:
Due Process Clause
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
linked to:
Fourteenth Amendment
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1937-12-06 ⓘ |
| dissentingJustice |
George Sutherland
ⓘ
James C. McReynolds ⓘ
linked to:
Justice James C. McReynolds
Pierce Butler ⓘ Willis Van Devanter ⓘ |
| fullName | Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ |
| holding |
Only those rights that are of the very essence of a scheme of ordered liberty are incorporated against the states
ⓘ
The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment is not applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| impact |
Established that not all provisions of the Bill of Rights apply to the states
ⓘ
Helped define the doctrine of selective incorporation ⓘ Influenced later incorporation cases under the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| issue | Whether the Double Jeopardy Clause is a fundamental right applicable to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| keyword |
Bill of Rights
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment incorporation ⓘ fundamental rights ⓘ |
| legalDoctrine |
ordered liberty test
ⓘ
selective incorporation ⓘ |
| majorityJustices |
George Sutherland
ⓘ
Harlan F. Stone ⓘ
linked to:
Justice Harlan F. Stone
Hugo L. Black ⓘ James C. McReynolds ⓘ
linked to:
Justice James C. McReynolds
Owen J. Roberts ⓘ
linked to:
Justice Owen J. Roberts
Pierce Butler ⓘ Stanley F. Reed ⓘ
linked to:
Stanley Forman Reed
|
| majorityOpinionBy |
Benjamin N. Cardozo
ⓘ
linked to:
Justice Benjamin N. Cardozo
|
| overruledBy | Benton v. Maryland ⓘ |
| overruledInPart | Benton v. Maryland ⓘ |
| overrulingCaseCitation | 395 U.S. 784 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Frank Palko ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Benton v. Maryland
ⓘ
Duncan v. Louisiana ⓘ Gitlow v. New York ⓘ Near v. Minnesota ⓘ |
| relatedConstitutionalProvision |
Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment
ⓘ
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent |
State of Connecticut
ⓘ
linked to:
Connecticut
|
| result | Conviction of Frank Palko for first-degree murder affirmed ⓘ |
| stateInvolved | Connecticut ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
double jeopardy
ⓘ
incorporation of the Bill of Rights ⓘ |
| volume | 302 ⓘ |
| year | 1937 ⓘ |
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: Palko v. Connecticut Description of subject: Palko v. Connecticut is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that helped define the doctrine of selective incorporation by holding that only certain fundamental rights in the Bill of Rights apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Referenced by (10)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
linked to: Palko v. Connecticut