Eisenstadt v. Baird
E126159
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.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Eisenstadt v. Baird canonical | 3 |
| Eisenstadt, Sheriff v. Baird | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1091202 — 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: Eisenstadt v. Baird Context triple: [William J. Brennan Jr., notableWork, Eisenstadt v. Baird]
-
A.
Van Orden v. Perry
Van Orden v. Perry is a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of a Ten Commandments monument on Texas State Capitol grounds against an Establishment Clause challenge.
-
B.
Alden v. Maine
Alden v. Maine is a 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded state sovereign immunity by holding that states are generally immune from private suits for damages in their own courts under federal law.
-
C.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
Planned Parenthood v. Casey is a landmark 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reaffirmed the constitutional right to abortion while allowing greater state regulation under the “undue burden” standard.
-
D.
City of Boerne v. Flores
City of Boerne v. Flores is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court case that curtailed Congress’s power under the Fourteenth Amendment and held that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act could not be applied to the states.
-
E.
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.
- 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: Eisenstadt v. Baird Target entity description: 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.
-
A.
Van Orden v. Perry
Van Orden v. Perry is a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of a Ten Commandments monument on Texas State Capitol grounds against an Establishment Clause challenge.
-
B.
Alden v. Maine
Alden v. Maine is a 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded state sovereign immunity by holding that states are generally immune from private suits for damages in their own courts under federal law.
-
C.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
Planned Parenthood v. Casey is a landmark 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reaffirmed the constitutional right to abortion while allowing greater state regulation under the “undue burden” standard.
-
D.
City of Boerne v. Flores
City of Boerne v. Flores is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court case that curtailed Congress’s power under the Fourteenth Amendment and held that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act could not be applied to the states.
-
E.
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.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (48)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
landmark decision ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1971-11-17 ⓘ |
| citation | 405 U.S. 438 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Potter Stewart
ⓘ
William O. Douglas ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Fourteenth Amendment
ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decidedYear | 1972 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1972-03-22 ⓘ |
| decisionType | constitutional law decision ⓘ |
| dissentBy |
Harry A. Blackmun
ⓘ
Lewis F. Powell Jr. ⓘ William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| fullName |
Eisenstadt v. Baird
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Eisenstadt, Sheriff v. Baird
|
| holding |
A Massachusetts law prohibiting distribution of contraceptives to unmarried persons violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
ⓘ
The right of privacy in matters of contraception extends to unmarried individuals. ⓘ |
| impact |
expanded constitutional protection for individual privacy beyond the marital relationship
ⓘ
extended the right to possess and use contraceptives to unmarried individuals in the United States ⓘ strengthened equal protection analysis of laws discriminating between married and unmarried persons ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
Potter Stewart ⓘ Thurgood Marshall ⓘ Warren E. Burger ⓘ William O. Douglas ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| keyQuote | If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child. ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Equal Protection Clause
ⓘ
contraception ⓘ right to privacy ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| originatingStateLaw | Massachusetts ⓘ |
| overturnedLaw | Massachusetts statute restricting distribution of contraceptives to married persons and to registered physicians and pharmacists ⓘ |
| page | 438 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Thomas S. Eisenstadt ⓘ |
| rearguedDate | 1972-01-12 ⓘ |
| relatedAreaOfLaw |
equal protection jurisprudence
ⓘ
reproductive rights ⓘ substantive due process ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Griswold v. Connecticut
ⓘ
Roe v. Wade ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent | William Baird NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
criminal prosecution for giving away contraceptives
ⓘ
distribution of contraceptives ⓘ |
| subsequentCitationIn |
Carey v. Population Services International
ⓘ
Roe v. Wade ⓘ |
| volume | 405 ⓘ |
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: Eisenstadt v. Baird Description of subject: 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.
Referenced by (4)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Eisenstadt, Sheriff v. Baird