R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul

E675188

United States Supreme Court case landmark decision

R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul is a landmark 1992 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a local hate-speech ordinance as unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment.

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

All labels observed (3)

Label	Occurrences
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul canonical	3
R.A.V.	1
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Minnesota	1

How this entity was disambiguated

This entity first appeared as the object of triple T7582147 — 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: R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul
Context triple: [Virginia v. Black, relatedTo, R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul]

A. Eisenstadt v. Baird
Eisenstadt v. Baird is a landmark 1972 U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended the right to possess and use contraceptives to unmarried individuals, significantly advancing privacy and equal protection jurisprudence.
B. Lee v. Weisman
Lee v. Weisman is a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held clergy-led prayer at public school graduation ceremonies unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.
C. Regan v. Wald
Regan v. Wald is a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal restrictions on travel to Cuba, affirming broad executive authority over foreign affairs and economic sanctions.
D. Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
E. County of Allegheny v. ACLU
County of Allegheny v. ACLU is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that refined the interpretation of the Establishment Clause by addressing the constitutionality of religious holiday displays on government property.
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: R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul
Target entity description: R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul is a landmark 1992 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a local hate-speech ordinance as unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment.

A. Eisenstadt v. Baird
Eisenstadt v. Baird is a landmark 1972 U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended the right to possess and use contraceptives to unmarried individuals, significantly advancing privacy and equal protection jurisprudence.
B. Lee v. Weisman
Lee v. Weisman is a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held clergy-led prayer at public school graduation ceremonies unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.
C. Regan v. Wald
Regan v. Wald is a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal restrictions on travel to Cuba, affirming broad executive authority over foreign affairs and economic sanctions.
D. Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
E. County of Allegheny v. ACLU
County of Allegheny v. ACLU is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that refined the interpretation of the Establishment Clause by addressing the constitutionality of religious holiday displays on government property.
F. None of above. chosen

Statements (47)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ
areaOfLaw	constitutional law ⓘ freedom of expression law ⓘ
arguedDate	1991-12-04 ⓘ
citation	505 U.S. 377 ⓘ
concurrenceBy	Byron R. White ⓘ Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ John Paul Stevens ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted	First Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
country	United States ⓘ linked to: United States of America
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	1992-06-22 ⓘ
decisionType	unanimous judgment with multiple concurrences ⓘ
docketNumber	90-7675 ⓘ
fullName	R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Minnesota ⓘ linked to: R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul
holding	Government may not engage in viewpoint discrimination within a proscribable category of speech ⓘ The St. Paul Bias-Motivated Crime Ordinance is facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment ⓘ The ordinance impermissibly discriminated on the basis of content and viewpoint ⓘ
impact	clarified that even within unprotected categories of speech, the government cannot favor or disfavor particular viewpoints ⓘ limited the ability of governments to enact hate-speech ordinances ⓘ
jurisdiction	United States federal law ⓘ
legalIssue	First Amendment freedom of speech ⓘ content-based regulation of speech ⓘ fighting words doctrine ⓘ viewpoint discrimination ⓘ
locationOfIncident	St. Paul, Minnesota ⓘ linked to: Saint Paul
majorityOpinionBy	Antonin Scalia ⓘ
majorityOpinionJoinedBy	Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ Byron R. White ⓘ Clarence Thomas ⓘ David H. Souter ⓘ John Paul Stevens ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
originatingCourt	Minnesota courts ⓘ
page	377 ⓘ
petitioner	R.A.V. ⓘ linked to: R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul
reporter	United States Reports ⓘ
respondent	City of St. Paul, Minnesota ⓘ linked to: City of Saint Paul
topic	bias-motivated crime ordinance ⓘ cross burning ⓘ hate speech regulation ⓘ symbolic speech ⓘ
volume	505 ⓘ
yearDecided	1992 ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (5)

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

Virginia v. Black → relatedTo → R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul ⓘ

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire → precedentFor → R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul ⓘ

United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court → significantCase → R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul ⓘ

R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul → fullName → R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Minnesota ⓘ

linked to: R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul

R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul → petitioner → R.A.V. ⓘ