• Facets (new session)
• Description
• Metadata
• Settings
  • Rule: ActivityStreamsMapasEquivalentb3sb3sifpdbprdf-labelfacetshttp://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/dbpedia#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/opencyc#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/umbel#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/yago#http://dbpedia.org/schema/property_rules#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/SUMO#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/WordNet#http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ldpoplwebskos-transurn:det:rdf:labelvirtrdf-labelvirtrdf-urlNone
    
  • Inverse Functional Properties: Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects
  • "Same As": Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects (recommended) Apply to subjects, objects and predicates (not recommended on big datasets) Apply to predicates only (special use cases only)

About: Constitution of North Carolina     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : dbo:Book, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)

Type: Thingyago:WikicatStateConstitutionsOfTheUnitedStatesyago:Abstraction100002137yago:Communication100033020yago:Document106470073yago:FundamentalLaw106533648yago:Law106532330yago:LegalDocument106479665yago:Writing106362953yago:WrittenCommunication106349220book New Facet based on Instances of this Class

The Constitution of the State of North Carolina governs the structure and function of the state government of North Carolina, one of the United States; it is the highest legal document for the state and subjugates North Carolina law. All U.S. state constitutions are, according to the United States Supreme Court, subject to federal judicial review; any provision can be nullified if it, in the view of a majority of the Justices of the Supreme Court, constituted from time to time, conflicts with the US Constitution or any federal law pursuant to the Constitution, even if the identical language was previously upheld as valid by the court.