Craig v. Boren
E14413
United States Supreme Court case
constitutional law case
equal protection case
gender discrimination case
Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
All labels observed (3)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Craig v. Boren canonical | 10 |
| Reed v. Reed | 1 |
| appellee in Craig v. Boren | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T79074 — 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: Craig v. Boren Context triple: [United States v. Virginia (1996) majority opinion, influencedBy, Craig v. Boren]
-
A.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
B.
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by affirming Congress’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in public accommodations under the Commerce Clause.
-
C.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
D.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
E.
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision that guaranteed the right to court-appointed counsel for criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney.
- 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: Craig v. Boren Target entity description: Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
A.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
B.
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States is a landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by affirming Congress’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in public accommodations under the Commerce Clause.
-
C.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
D.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
E.
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision that guaranteed the right to court-appointed counsel for criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ equal protection case ⓘ gender discrimination case ⓘ |
| appliesTo | gender-based classifications ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
United States constitutional law
ⓘ
civil rights law ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1976-10-05 ⓘ |
| challengedStatute | Oklahoma statute establishing different age limits for the sale of 3.2% beer to males and females ⓘ |
| citation | 429 U.S. 190 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
John Paul Stevens
ⓘ
Lewis F. Powell Jr. ⓘ |
| concurrenceInJudgmentBy | William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Equal Protection Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1976-12-20 ⓘ |
| decisionType | majority decision ⓘ |
| defendant | David Boren ⓘ |
| defendantOffice | Governor of Oklahoma ⓘ |
| dissentBy |
Harry A. Blackmun
ⓘ
Warren E. Burger ⓘ William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| effect |
limited states' ability to enact gender-discriminatory laws
ⓘ
strengthened judicial review of sex-based classifications ⓘ |
| fullName | Craig v. Boren self-link ⓘ |
| issue | Constitutionality of different minimum drinking ages for men and women ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
John Paul Stevens ⓘ Lewis F. Powell Jr. ⓘ Potter Stewart ⓘ Thurgood Marshall ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| legalHolding |
Gender-based classifications are subject to intermediate scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause
ⓘ
Statutory sex-based differences must serve important governmental objectives and must be substantially related to achievement of those objectives ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| originatingState | Oklahoma ⓘ |
| plaintiff |
Carolyn Whitener
ⓘ
Curtis Craig ⓘ |
| precedentialStatus | binding precedent on federal and state courts in the United States ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine |
equal protection analysis
ⓘ
levels of scrutiny ⓘ |
| remedy | Oklahoma statute held unconstitutional as a denial of equal protection ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| standardOfReviewEstablished | intermediate scrutiny ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
equal protection
ⓘ
gender discrimination ⓘ |
| subsequentCitationFrequency | frequently cited in gender discrimination cases ⓘ |
| volume | 429 ⓘ |
| year | 1976 ⓘ |
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: Craig v. Boren Description of subject: Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
Referenced by (12)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Reed v. Reed
this entity surface form:
appellee in Craig v. Boren