Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University
E941922
Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University is a landmark legal case involving the misuse of Indigenous DNA samples in genetic research, which raised major ethical and legal questions about informed consent and tribal sovereignty over genetic material.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T11709207 — 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: Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University Context triple: [Havasupai, notableLegalCase, Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University]
-
A.
Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.
Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. is a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case that held federal law preempts Arizona’s requirement that prospective voters provide documentary proof of citizenship when registering using the federal form.
-
B.
Arizona v. United States
Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.
-
C.
Arizona v. Evans
Arizona v. Evans is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained through an arrest based on erroneous computer records.
-
D.
Arizona v. Johnson
Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
-
E.
Kleppe v. New Mexico
Kleppe v. New Mexico is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed broad federal authority over public lands and wildlife under the Constitution’s Property 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: Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University Target entity description: Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University is a landmark legal case involving the misuse of Indigenous DNA samples in genetic research, which raised major ethical and legal questions about informed consent and tribal sovereignty over genetic material.
-
A.
Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.
Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. is a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case that held federal law preempts Arizona’s requirement that prospective voters provide documentary proof of citizenship when registering using the federal form.
-
B.
Arizona v. United States
Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.
-
C.
Arizona v. Evans
Arizona v. Evans is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained through an arrest based on erroneous computer records.
-
D.
Arizona v. Johnson
Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
-
E.
Kleppe v. New Mexico
Kleppe v. New Mexico is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed broad federal authority over public lands and wildlife under the Constitution’s Property Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (55)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
human subjects research controversy
ⓘ
legal case ⓘ research ethics case ⓘ |
| alleges |
breach of fiduciary duty
ⓘ
fraud ⓘ intentional infliction of emotional distress ⓘ lack of informed consent ⓘ misrepresentation of research purposes ⓘ negligence ⓘ unauthorized secondary use of samples ⓘ violation of civil rights ⓘ |
| aroseFrom |
collection of blood samples from Havasupai tribal members
ⓘ
diabetes research project with the Havasupai Tribe ⓘ use of samples for studies beyond diabetes ⓘ |
| concerns |
Indigenous DNA samples
ⓘ
cultural harm ⓘ data ownership ⓘ genetic research ⓘ group harms in research ⓘ human subjects research ⓘ |
| defendant |
Arizona Board of Regents
ⓘ
Arizona State University researchers ⓘ |
| involves |
Arizona Board of Regents
ⓘ
Arizona State University ⓘ Arizona State University researchers ⓘ Havasupai Tribe ⓘ
linked to:
Havasupai Tribe of the Havasupai Reservation
|
| jurisdiction |
Arizona
ⓘ
United States ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| legalOutcome | settlement ⓘ |
| legalSignificance |
became a key case in Indigenous research ethics discourse
ⓘ
highlighted need for specific informed consent for genetic research ⓘ influenced institutional review board practices ⓘ raised questions about ownership of genetic material ⓘ used as a teaching case in bioethics and law courses ⓘ |
| mainSubject |
informed consent in genetic research
ⓘ
misuse of DNA samples ⓘ privacy of genetic information ⓘ research ethics with Indigenous communities ⓘ scope of consent for secondary research use ⓘ tribal sovereignty over genetic material ⓘ |
| plaintiff |
Havasupai Tribe
ⓘ
linked to:
Havasupai Tribe of the Havasupai Reservation
|
| relatedTo |
Indigenous data sovereignty
ⓘ
community-based participatory research ⓘ genomic data governance ⓘ tribal sovereignty ⓘ |
| secondaryUseIncluded |
inbreeding studies
ⓘ
other genetic studies not consented to by the tribe ⓘ population migration studies ⓘ schizophrenia research ⓘ |
| settlementIncluded |
monetary compensation to Havasupai Tribe
ⓘ
restrictions on future use of samples ⓘ return of DNA samples ⓘ support for health and education initiatives for the Havasupai Tribe ⓘ |
| timePeriod |
1990s
ⓘ
2000s ⓘ |
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: Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University Description of subject: Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona State University is a landmark legal case involving the misuse of Indigenous DNA samples in genetic research, which raised major ethical and legal questions about informed consent and tribal sovereignty over genetic material.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.