State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939)
E73637
State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939), is the Connecticut Supreme Court decision that preceded and was later reviewed in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court First Amendment case Cantwell v. Connecticut.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| State v. Cantwell | 1 |
| State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939) canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T587432 — 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: State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939) Context triple: [Cantwell v. Connecticut, priorHistory, State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939)]
-
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.
Palko v. Connecticut
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.
-
C.
Connecticut Supreme Court
The Connecticut Supreme Court is the state's highest appellate court, responsible for interpreting Connecticut law and the state constitution.
-
D.
Connecticut General Court
The Connecticut General Court was the colonial-era legislature and governing body of Connecticut, responsible for making laws and overseeing the colony’s administration in early New England.
-
E.
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.
- 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: State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939) Target entity description: State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939), is the Connecticut Supreme Court decision that preceded and was later reviewed in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court First Amendment case Cantwell 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.
Palko v. Connecticut
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.
-
C.
Connecticut Supreme Court
The Connecticut Supreme Court is the state's highest appellate court, responsible for interpreting Connecticut law and the state constitution.
-
D.
Connecticut General Court
The Connecticut General Court was the colonial-era legislature and governing body of Connecticut, responsible for making laws and overseeing the colony’s administration in early New England.
-
E.
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.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (30)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Connecticut Supreme Court case
ⓘ
judicial decision ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ religious liberty ⓘ |
| citation |
126 Conn. 1
ⓘ
8 A.2d 533 ⓘ |
| country |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| court |
Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut
ⓘ
linked to:
Connecticut Supreme Court
|
| decisionYear | 1939 ⓘ |
| defendant |
Cantwell family members
ⓘ
Newton Cantwell ⓘ |
| followedBy |
Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940)
ⓘ
linked to:
Cantwell v. Connecticut
|
| fullCaseName | State v. Cantwell ⓘ |
| involves |
Jehovah's Witnesses
ⓘ
linked to:
JehovahsWitnesses
|
| jurisdiction | Connecticut ⓘ |
| language | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
application of state statute to Jehovah's Witnesses
ⓘ
constitutionality of licensing requirement for religious solicitation ⓘ |
| plaintiff |
State of Connecticut
ⓘ
linked to:
Connecticut
|
| precededBy | trial court conviction of Cantwell ⓘ |
| proceduralPosture | state criminal conviction appealed to state supreme court ⓘ |
| regionalReporterCitation |
Atlantic Reporter, Second Series
ⓘ
linked to:
Atlantic Reporter
|
| relatedCase |
Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940)
ⓘ
linked to:
Cantwell v. Connecticut
|
| reviewedBy |
United States Supreme Court
ⓘ
linked to:
Supreme Court of the United States
|
| stateCitation | Connecticut Reports ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
First Amendment freedoms
ⓘ
free exercise of religion ⓘ freedom of speech ⓘ |
| subsequentHistory | reviewed in Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940) ⓘ |
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: State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939) Description of subject: State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939), is the Connecticut Supreme Court decision that preceded and was later reviewed in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court First Amendment case Cantwell v. Connecticut.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
linked to: State v. Cantwell, 126 Conn. 1, 8 A.2d 533 (1939)