This HTML5 document contains 168 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
n20https://web.archive.org/web/20170120170455/http:/harvardcrcl.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/
dcthttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
yago-reshttp://yago-knowledge.org/resource/
n8https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/92/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n18https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/89309/united-states-v-cruikshank/
n28https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
n23http://harvardcrcl.org/archive/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
n13https://openjurist.org/92/us/
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n27https://web.archive.org/web/20150107063310/http:/columbialawreview.org/thirteenth-amendment-optimism/
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
n26http://dbpedia.org/property/concurrence/
n22https://web.archive.org/web/20151117023919/http:/columbialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
n30http://dbpedia.org/property/joinconcurrence/
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n4http://columbialawreview.org/thirteenth-amendment-optimism/
n5https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/92/542/
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/
n19http://harvardcrcl.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/
n14http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep092/usrep092542/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:United_States_v._Cruikshank
rdf:type
dbo:UnitOfWork yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:WikicatCriminalCasesInTheWaiteCourt yago:Abstraction100002137 dbo:Case yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity yago:Happening107283608 wikidata:Q2334719 owl:Thing yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 dbo:LegalCase
rdfs:label
United States v. Cruikshank
rdfs:comment
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876), was a major decision of the United States Supreme Court ruling that the U.S. Bill of Rights did not limit the power of private actors or state governments despite the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. It reversed the federal criminal convictions for the civil rights violations committed in aid of anti-Reconstruction murders. Decided during the Reconstruction Era, the case represented a major defeat for federal efforts to protect the civil rights of African Americans.
foaf:name
United States v. Cruikshank, et al.
dct:subject
dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Waite_Court dbc:1876_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_Freedom_of_Assembly_Clause_case_law dbc:Criminal_cases_in_the_Waite_Court dbc:Overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions dbc:United_States_Fourteenth_Amendment_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:Riots_and_civil_disorder_during_the_Reconstruction_Era dbc:African-American_history_between_emancipation_and_the_civil_rights_movement dbc:United_States_Fifteenth_Amendment_case_law dbc:Grant_Parish,_Louisiana dbc:United_States_Second_Amendment_case_law
dbo:wikiPageID
442342
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1124835329
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases,_volume_92 dbr:Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_Rights dbc:1876_in_United_States_case_law dbr:McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Waite_Court dbr:Red_Shirts_(Southern_United_States) dbr:Leonard_Levy dbr:Columbia_Law_School dbr:Morrison_Waite dbr:Harvard_Law_School dbr:United_States_v._Miller dbr:Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Paramilitary dbr:Enforcement_Act_of_1870 dbr:United_States_v._Morrison dbc:United_States_Freedom_of_Assembly_Clause_case_law dbr:Freedom_of_assembly dbr:Colfax_massacre dbr:William_Rehnquist dbr:Literacy_test dbr:Louisiana_gubernatorial_election,_1872 dbr:First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbc:Criminal_cases_in_the_Waite_Court dbr:Christopher_Columbus_Nash dbr:United_States_v._Guest dbr:Reconstruction_era dbr:Due_process dbc:Overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions dbr:William_Tod_Otto dbr:McDonald_v._Chicago dbr:Sheriff dbr:Due_Process_Clause dbr:Ku_Klux_Klan dbr:List_of_Justices_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbr:State_actor dbr:De_Jonge_v._Oregon dbr:District_of_Columbia_v._Heller dbr:Republican_Party_(United_States) dbr:Poll_tax_(United_States) dbc:United_States_Fourteenth_Amendment_case_law dbr:Colfax,_Louisiana dbr:List_of_landmark_court_decisions_in_the_United_States dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbr:Presser_v._Illinois dbr:Vigilante dbr:Equal_Protection_Clause dbr:State_governments_of_the_United_States dbr:Columbia_Law_Review dbc:Riots_and_civil_disorder_during_the_Reconstruction_Era dbr:Justice_of_the_peace dbr:United_States_Bill_of_Rights dbr:African_Americans dbr:Harvard_Civil_Rights-Civil_Liberties_Law_Review dbc:African-American_history_between_emancipation_and_the_civil_rights_movement dbr:U.S._Bill_of_Rights dbr:Grant_Parish,_Louisiana dbr:Nathan_Clifford dbc:United_States_Fifteenth_Amendment_case_law dbr:Confederate_States_of_America dbr:Sullivan_Act dbr:U.S._LEXIS dbr:Democratic_Party_(United_States) dbr:Civil_Rights_Cases dbr:Grandfather_clause dbr:William_Pitt_Kellogg dbc:Grant_Parish,_Louisiana dbr:Disfranchisement_after_the_Civil_War dbr:United_States_v._Price dbr:United_States_Supreme_Court dbc:United_States_Second_Amendment_case_law dbr:Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms_in_the_United_States dbr:Judiciary_of_Louisiana dbr:Gun_control dbr:L._Ed. dbr:Jim_Crow_laws dbr:Fusion_Party
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n4: n5: n19:385_Pope.pdf n20:385_Pope.pdf n22:1733-1768.pdf n23: n8:542.html n27: n14:usrep092542.pdf n18: n13:542
owl:sameAs
freebase:m.02904q wikidata:Q7893259 yago-res:United_States_v._Cruikshank n28:4wvAz
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:US1stAmendment dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:US2ndAmendment dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Page_needed dbt:Reconstruction_Era dbt:Short_description dbt:Main dbt:Cite_journal dbt:Reflist dbt:Wikisource-inline dbt:Ussc dbt:Webarchive dbt:Citation_needed
dbp:joinmajority
Swayne, Miller, Field, Strong
dbp:parallelcitations
2
dbp:uspage
542
dbp:usvol
92
dbp:argueyear
1875
dbp:case
United States v. Cruikshank,
dbp:courtlistener
n18:
dbp:date
2017-01-20
dbp:decidedate
0001-03-27
dbp:decideyear
1876
dbp:findlaw
n8:542.html
dbp:fullname
United States v. Cruikshank, et al.
dbp:holding
The right of assembly under the First Amendment and the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment are only applicable to the federal government, not the states or private actors.
dbp:justia
n5:
dbp:litigants
United States v. Cruikshank
dbp:majority
Waite
dbp:url
n20:385_Pope.pdf
dbp:loc
n14:usrep092542.pdf
dbo:abstract
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876), was a major decision of the United States Supreme Court ruling that the U.S. Bill of Rights did not limit the power of private actors or state governments despite the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. It reversed the federal criminal convictions for the civil rights violations committed in aid of anti-Reconstruction murders. Decided during the Reconstruction Era, the case represented a major defeat for federal efforts to protect the civil rights of African Americans. The case developed from the strongly contested 1872 Louisiana gubernatorial election and the subsequent Colfax massacre, in which dozens of black people and three white people were killed. Federal charges were brought against several whites using the Enforcement Act of 1870, which prohibited two or more people from conspiring to deprive anyone of their constitutional rights. Charges included hindering the freedmen's First Amendment right to freely assemble and their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. In his majority opinion, Chief Justice Morrison Waite reversed the convictions of the defendants, judging that the plaintiffs had to rely on Louisiana state courts for protection. Waite ruled that neither the First Amendment nor the Second Amendment limited the powers of state governments or individuals. He further ruled that the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment limited the lawful actions of state governments, but not of individuals. The decision left African Americans in the South at the mercy of increasingly hostile state governments dominated by white Democratic legislatures, and allowed groups such as the Ku Klux Klan to continue to use paramilitary force to suppress black voting. Cruikshank was the first case to come before the Supreme Court that involved a possible violation of the Second Amendment. Decades after Cruikshank, the Supreme Court began incorporating the Bill of Rights to apply to state governments. The Court incorporated the First Amendment's freedom of assembly in De Jonge v. Oregon (1937), while the Second Amendment was incorporated in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010).
dbp:arguedatea
0001-03-30
dbp:arguedateb
0001-06-24
n26:dissent
Clifford
n30:dissent
Davis, Bradley, Hunt
dbp:openjurist
n13:542
dbp:overruled
McDonald v. City of Chicago De Jonge v. Oregon
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:United_States_v._Cruikshank?oldid=1124835329&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
19909
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:United_States_v._Cruikshank