Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland
E496717
Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed federal court jurisdiction and state sovereign immunity in disputes over telecommunications regulation under the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T5127231 — 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: Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland Context triple: [Ex parte Young, relatedCase, Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland]
-
A.
MCI v. AT&T
MCI v. AT&T was a landmark U.S. antitrust lawsuit in the telecommunications industry that challenged AT&T’s monopoly and helped open the long-distance market to competition.
-
B.
United States v. AT&T
United States v. AT&T was a landmark antitrust lawsuit in which the U.S. government forced the breakup of the Bell System telecommunications monopoly in the early 1980s.
-
C.
Maryland v. Wirtz
Maryland v. Wirtz was a 1968 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the extension of federal minimum wage and overtime provisions to employees of state-operated schools and hospitals under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
-
D.
Barron v. Baltimore
Barron v. Baltimore is an 1833 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Bill of Rights restricts only the federal government, not the states.
-
E.
Supreme Court of Virginia v. Friedman
Supreme Court of Virginia v. Friedman is a 1988 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down Virginia’s residency requirement for bar admission on motion as a violation of the Privileges and Immunities 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: Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland Target entity description: Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed federal court jurisdiction and state sovereign immunity in disputes over telecommunications regulation under the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
-
A.
MCI v. AT&T
MCI v. AT&T was a landmark U.S. antitrust lawsuit in the telecommunications industry that challenged AT&T’s monopoly and helped open the long-distance market to competition.
-
B.
United States v. AT&T
United States v. AT&T was a landmark antitrust lawsuit in which the U.S. government forced the breakup of the Bell System telecommunications monopoly in the early 1980s.
-
C.
Maryland v. Wirtz
Maryland v. Wirtz was a 1968 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the extension of federal minimum wage and overtime provisions to employees of state-operated schools and hospitals under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
-
D.
Barron v. Baltimore
Barron v. Baltimore is an 1833 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the Bill of Rights restricts only the federal government, not the states.
-
E.
Supreme Court of Virginia v. Friedman
Supreme Court of Virginia v. Friedman is a 1988 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down Virginia’s residency requirement for bar admission on motion as a violation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
federal court case ⓘ telecommunications law case ⓘ |
| citation | 535 U.S. 635 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Clarence Thomas
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInvolved | Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2002-05-20 ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 00-1531 ⓘ |
| fullName | Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| geographicScope | State of Maryland NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holding |
Federal district courts have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 to review claims that a state commission order violates federal law, including the Telecommunications Act of 1996
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Section 252(e)(6) of the Telecommunications Act does not divest federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 ⓘ The Eleventh Amendment does not bar a suit for prospective injunctive relief against state officials alleged to be acting in violation of federal law under Ex parte Young ⓘ |
| importance |
leading case on federal jurisdiction over state commission decisions under the Telecommunications Act of 1996
ⓘ
significant precedent on the application of Ex parte Young to telecommunications regulation disputes ⓘ |
| industryContext | telecommunications industry ⓘ |
| issue |
whether federal district courts have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 to review state commission orders alleged to violate the Telecommunications Act of 1996
ⓘ
whether the Eleventh Amendment bars a suit against state commissioners for prospective injunctive relief ⓘ |
| jurisdictionQuestion | scope of federal district court review of state public utility commission decisions under federal law ⓘ |
| legalSubject |
Ex parte Young doctrine
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Telecommunications Act of 1996 NERFINISHED ⓘ federal jurisdiction ⓘ federal–state relations in telecommunications regulation ⓘ state sovereign immunity ⓘ |
| lowerCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| lowerCourtDisposition | dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and on Eleventh Amendment grounds ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Antonin Scalia NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| opinionType | unanimous opinion in part ⓘ |
| page | 635 ⓘ |
| petitioner | Verizon Maryland Inc. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedAreaOfLaw |
administrative law
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ federal courts ⓘ telecommunications regulation ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine | Ex parte Young NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent |
Commissioners of the Public Service Commission of Maryland
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Public Service Commission of Maryland NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| result | Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed ⓘ |
| shortName | Verizon Maryland NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted |
28 U.S.C. § 1331
ⓘ
Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 252 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | interconnection agreement disputes between incumbent local exchange carrier and competitive local exchange carrier ⓘ |
| volume | 535 ⓘ |
| vote | 9-0 on jurisdiction and sovereign immunity issues ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 2002 ⓘ |
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: Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland Description of subject: Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed federal court jurisdiction and state sovereign immunity in disputes over telecommunications regulation under the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.