In re Debs Supreme Court case

E58074

United States Supreme Court case federal courts case labor law case

In re Debs was an 1895 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s authority to use injunctions and troops to end the Pullman Strike, significantly expanding federal power over labor disputes and interstate commerce.

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

AI illustration

All labels observed (5)

Label	Occurrences
In re Debs Supreme Court case canonical	2
In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564 (1895)	2
In re Debs	1
Opinion in In re Debs	1
Use of federal injunctions in the Pullman Strike	1

How this entity was disambiguated

This entity first appeared as the object of triple T463054 — 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: In re Debs Supreme Court case
Context triple: [Pullman Strike, followedBy, In re Debs Supreme Court case]

A. Debs v. United States
Debs v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case in which socialist leader Eugene V. Debs’s conviction for antiwar speech was upheld, reinforcing broad limits on free speech during wartime.
B. Gitlow v. New York
Gitlow v. New York is a 1925 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked a major step in applying First Amendment free speech protections to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
C. Schenck v. United States
Schenck v. United States is a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the “clear and present danger” test, allowing the government to restrict speech during wartime.
D. Lochner v. New York
Lochner v. New York is a landmark 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a state labor regulation and became emblematic of the era in which the Court used substantive due process to protect economic liberty and limit government regulation of business.
E. 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.
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: In re Debs Supreme Court case
Target entity description: In re Debs was an 1895 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s authority to use injunctions and troops to end the Pullman Strike, significantly expanding federal power over labor disputes and interstate commerce.

A. Debs v. United States
Debs v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case in which socialist leader Eugene V. Debs’s conviction for antiwar speech was upheld, reinforcing broad limits on free speech during wartime.
B. Gitlow v. New York
Gitlow v. New York is a 1925 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked a major step in applying First Amendment free speech protections to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
C. Schenck v. United States
Schenck v. United States is a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the “clear and present danger” test, allowing the government to restrict speech during wartime.
D. Lochner v. New York
Lochner v. New York is a landmark 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a state labor regulation and became emblematic of the era in which the Court used substantive due process to protect economic liberty and limit government regulation of business.
E. 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.
F. None of above. chosen

Statements (49)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ federal courts case ⓘ labor law case ⓘ
alsoKnownAs	Debs v. United States (informal name) ⓘ linked to: Debs v. United States
areaOfLaw	constitutional law ⓘ federal courts and jurisdiction ⓘ interstate commerce ⓘ labor law ⓘ
citationStyle	In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564 (1895) ⓘ linked to: In re Debs Supreme Court case
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	1895-05-27 ⓘ
decisionType	unanimous decision ⓘ
effect	expanded federal power over labor disputes affecting interstate commerce ⓘ limited autonomy of labor unions in nationwide strikes ⓘ strengthened use of labor injunctions against unions ⓘ
fullName	In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564 (1895) ⓘ linked to: In re Debs Supreme Court case
historicalContext	Gilded Age labor conflicts ⓘ
historicalSignificance	landmark case in legitimizing federal intervention in labor strikes ⓘ
holding	The contempt convictions of Eugene V. Debs and others for violating a federal injunction were upheld. ⓘ The federal government may obtain injunctions to halt labor strikes that interfere with interstate commerce and the mails. ⓘ The federal government may use troops to enforce federal court injunctions and ensure the operation of interstate commerce and the mails. ⓘ linked to: Federal government
involvedOrganization	American Railway Union ⓘ Pullman Palace Car Company ⓘ United States Army ⓘ United States Department of Justice ⓘ
involvedPerson	Eugene V. Debs ⓘ
jurisdiction	United States ⓘ linked to: United States of America
legalIssue	contempt of court for violating injunction ⓘ federal authority over interstate commerce ⓘ federal authority over the mails ⓘ federal power to issue labor injunctions ⓘ
location	Washington, D.C. ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	Justice David J. Brewer ⓘ linked to: David J. Brewer
page	564 ⓘ
petitioner	United States ⓘ linked to: United States of America
precedentFor	later federal labor injunction cases ⓘ
relatedConcept	federal police power ⓘ interstate commerce clause ⓘ labor injunction ⓘ mail power of Congress ⓘ
relatedEvent	Pullman Strike ⓘ
respondent	Eugene V. Debs ⓘ officers of the American Railway Union ⓘ
subjectMatter	federal injunctions in labor disputes ⓘ scope of federal police power ⓘ use of federal troops in domestic disturbances ⓘ
volume	158 U.S. ⓘ
vote	9-0 ⓘ
year	1895 ⓘ