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.

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

AI illustration

All labels observed (2)

Label	Occurrences
Palko v. Connecticut canonical	12
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 ⓘ linked to: Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution 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

Referenced by (13)

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

Due Process Clause → interpretedInCase → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Incorporation doctrine → keyCase → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Palko v. Connecticut → fullName → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Barron v. Baltimore → relatedCase → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

United States Supreme Court cases of the Hughes Court → includesCase → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Duncan v. Louisiana → relatedCase → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Benton v. Maryland → overruled → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Benton v. Maryland → overruledCitation → Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 (1937) ⓘ

linked to: Palko v. Connecticut

Frank Palko → roleIn → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Frank Palko → hasCaseName → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Twining v. New Jersey → relatedCase → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Adamson v. California → relatedCase → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

Hughes Court → knownForCase → Palko v. Connecticut ⓘ

All labels observed (2)

How this entity was disambiguated Show

Statements (53)

How these facts were elicited Show

Referenced by (13)

How this entity was disambiguated

How these facts were elicited