Brandenburg v. Ohio
E33569
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.
All labels observed (4)
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T252940 — 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: Brandenburg v. Ohio Context triple: [First Amendment to the United States Constitution, hasLandmarkCase, Brandenburg v. Ohio]
-
A.
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio is a landmark 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the exclusionary rule to the states, holding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions.
-
B.
Gitlow v. New York
Gitlow v. New York is a 1925 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked a major step in applying First Amendment free speech protections to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
C.
Printz v. United States
Printz v. United States is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited federal power by holding that Congress cannot compel state or local officials to implement federal regulatory programs.
-
D.
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.
-
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: Brandenburg v. Ohio Target entity description: 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.
-
A.
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio is a landmark 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the exclusionary rule to the states, holding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions.
-
B.
Gitlow v. New York
Gitlow v. New York is a 1925 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked a major step in applying First Amendment free speech protections to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
C.
Printz v. United States
Printz v. United States is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited federal power by holding that Congress cannot compel state or local officials to implement federal regulatory programs.
-
D.
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.
-
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 (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
First Amendment case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| appliedToStatesThrough |
Fourteenth Amendment
ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ freedom of expression ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1969-02-27 ⓘ |
| category |
1969 in United States case law
ⓘ
United States free speech case ⓘ |
| citation | 395 U.S. 444 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision | First Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ |
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1969-06-09 ⓘ |
| decisionType | per curiam opinion ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 492 ⓘ |
| establishedTest | imminent lawless action test ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
Brandenburg v. Ohio
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Clarence Brandenburg v. State of Ohio
|
| holding | Government may punish advocacy of illegal action only where it is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action. ⓘ |
| impact |
narrowed the circumstances under which speech advocating violence can be punished
ⓘ
significantly strengthened free speech protections in the United States ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| keyPrinciple |
Abstract advocacy of violence is protected speech unless it is directed to inciting imminent lawless action and likely to produce such action.
ⓘ
The state cannot forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action. ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
First Amendment freedom of speech
criminal syndicalism laws ⓘ incitement to violence ⓘ |
| locationOfEvents | Ohio ⓘ |
| modifiedPrecedent |
Dennis v. United States
ⓘ
Schenck v. United States ⓘ |
| opinionOfTheCourtBy | Per curiam ⓘ |
| overruledPrecedent | Whitney v. California ⓘ |
| page | 444 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Clarence Brandenburg ⓘ |
| precedentialScope | binding on all U.S. federal and state courts ⓘ |
| rearguedDate | 1969-03-10 ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent |
Ohio
ⓘ
surface form:
State of Ohio
|
| result |
Brandenburg's conviction reversed
ⓘ
Ohio criminal syndicalism statute held unconstitutional as applied ⓘ |
| standardReplaced | clear and present danger test ⓘ |
| stateLawInvolved | Ohio Criminal Syndicalism Act ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
Ku Klux Klan rally speech
ⓘ
advocacy of violence ⓘ |
| subsequentCitationBy |
Hess v. Indiana
ⓘ
NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. ⓘ Virginia v. Black ⓘ |
| volume | 395 ⓘ |
| vote | unanimous ⓘ |
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: Brandenburg v. Ohio Description of subject: 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.
Referenced by (15)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Clarence Brandenburg v. State of Ohio
this entity surface form:
Its approach to subversive advocacy was limited by Brandenburg v. Ohio.
this entity surface form:
Brandenburg v. Ohio imminent lawless action test