Prince v. Massachusetts
E362104
Prince v. Massachusetts is a 1944 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld state authority to regulate child labor and limit children's religiously motivated activities in public for their protection.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts | 1 |
| Prince v. Massachusetts canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T3488661 — 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: Prince v. Massachusetts Context triple: [United States Supreme Court cases of the Stone Court, includesCase, Prince v. Massachusetts]
-
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.
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.
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.
Eisenstadt v. Baird
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.
-
E.
McCullen v. Coakley
McCullen v. Coakley is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down Massachusetts’ abortion-clinic buffer zone law as violating the First Amendment’s free speech protections.
- 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: Prince v. Massachusetts Target entity description: Prince v. Massachusetts is a 1944 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld state authority to regulate child labor and limit children's religiously motivated activities in public for their protection.
-
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.
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.
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.
Eisenstadt v. Baird
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.
-
E.
McCullen v. Coakley
McCullen v. Coakley is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down Massachusetts’ abortion-clinic buffer zone law as violating the First Amendment’s free speech protections.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (50)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
landmark decision ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
First Amendment law
constitutional law ⓘ family law ⓘ labor law ⓘ |
| argued | 1943-12-14 ⓘ |
| citation | 321 U.S. 158 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decided | 1944-01-31 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1944-01-31 ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy |
Justice Frank Murphy
ⓘ
Justice Owen J. Roberts ⓘ Robert H. Jackson ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Robert H. Jackson (in part)
|
| docketNumber | No. 260 ⓘ |
| factSummary | A Jehovah's Witness guardian allowed her minor niece to distribute religious literature on the streets in violation of a child labor law. ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
Prince v. Massachusetts
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts
|
| holding |
Parental authority and religious freedom do not include a right to expose children to potential harm in violation of valid child labor laws.
ⓘ
The state may regulate the activities of children in public places in the interest of their welfare and safety. ⓘ |
| joinedByMajority |
Justice Harlan F. Stone
ⓘ
surface form:
Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone
Felix Frankfurter ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Felix Frankfurter
Hugo L. Black ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Hugo L. Black
Robert H. Jackson ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Robert H. Jackson
Justice Stanley Reed ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Stanley F. Reed
Justice Wiley B. Rutledge ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| legalIssue |
child labor regulation
ⓘ
free exercise of religion ⓘ parental rights ⓘ state police power ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Justice Wiley B. Rutledge ⓘ |
| page | 158 ⓘ |
| party |
Massachusetts
ⓘ
surface form:
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Sarah Prince ⓘ |
| precedentFor |
balancing parental rights and child welfare
ⓘ
limits on free exercise claims involving minors ⓘ state authority to limit children’s religiously motivated activities in public ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Meyer v. Nebraska
ⓘ
Pierce v. Society of Sisters ⓘ Wisconsin v. Yoder ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
parens patriae
ⓘ
police power of the state ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| result | conviction affirmed ⓘ |
| stateLawInvolved | Massachusetts child labor statute ⓘ |
| volume | 321 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1944 ⓘ |
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: Prince v. Massachusetts Description of subject: Prince v. Massachusetts is a 1944 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld state authority to regulate child labor and limit children's religiously motivated activities in public for their protection.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts