This HTML5 document contains 176 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

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

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
n19http://dbpedia.org/resource/Wikt:
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
yago-reshttp://yago-knowledge.org/resource/
n9https://scholar.google.com/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n18http://supreme.justia.com/us/395/444/
n28https://www.courtlistener.com/scotus/y6t/clarence-brandenburg-appellant-v-state-of-ohio/
n25https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
n22https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/
umbel-rchttp://umbel.org/umbel/rc/
n21http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n23http://dbpedia.org/resource/Landmark_Cases:
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
dbpedia-cshttp://cs.dbpedia.org/resource/
n29http://landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/23/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
n31http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep395/usrep395444/
dbpedia-zhhttp://zh.dbpedia.org/resource/
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n17https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/
dbpedia-jahttp://ja.dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Brandenburg_v._Ohio
rdf:type
yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:Abstraction100002137 dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase yago:Happening107283608 umbel-rc:Event wikidata:Q2334719 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity yago:Event100029378 owl:Thing yago:Case107308889 dbo:UnitOfWork dbo:LegalCase yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases dbo:Case
rdfs:label
ブランデンバーグ対オハイオ州事件 Brandenburg vs. Ohio 布兰登伯格诉俄亥俄州案 Brandenburg v. Ohio
rdfs:comment
布兰登伯格诉俄亥俄州案（英語：Brandenburg v. Ohio），395 U.S. 444 (1969)，是美国最高法院具有里程碑意义的案件，法院根據美國憲法第一修正案裁定，政府不得惩罚發表煽动性言论的人，除非该人發表的言论“煽动他人立即實施违法行為”，而且该煽动性言論的确可能会造成他人立即犯罪。美國最高法院否决了俄亥俄州的《组织犯罪防治法》，《组织犯罪防治法》禁止任何人發表有關犯罪、破坏、暴力或其他恐怖手段的言論。 ブランデンバーグ対オハイオ州事件（ブランデンバーグたいオハイオしゅうじけん、Brandenburg v. Ohio）395 U.S. 444 (1969)は、アメリカ合衆国連邦最高裁判所が、 アメリカ合衆国憲法修正第1条に関するランドマーク的な判決を言い渡した事件。裁判所は、その表現が「差し迫った違法行為を唱道するか、またはそのような行為を生ぜしめる可能性が高い場合」でない限り、その表現者を処罰することは出来ないと判決した。この判決により、裁判所はオハイオ州の犯罪サンディカリズム法が暴力の単なるアドボカシーを過度に広範に禁じているとして、その法律を無効にした。 Brandenburg v. Ohio 395 U.S. 444 (1969) je jeden z případů amerického Nejvyššího soudu, které formovaly americkou ústavu. Určil hranice svobody projevu ve Spojených státech amerických. Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action". Specifically, the Court struck down Ohio's criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence. In the process, Whitney v. California (1927) was explicitly overruled, and Schenck v. United States (1919), Abrams v. United States (1919), Gitlow v. New York (1925), and Dennis v. United States (1951). were effectively overturned.
foaf:name
Clarence Brandenburg v. State of Ohio
dcterms:subject
dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Warren_Court dbc:History_of_racism_in_Ohio dbc:Ku_Klux_Klan dbc:United_States_Free_Speech_Clause_case_law dbc:1969_in_United_States_case_law dbc:American_Civil_Liberties_Union_litigation dbc:Hate_speech_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions_that_overrule_a_prior_Supreme_Court_decision dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases
dbo:wikiPageID
219211
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1121848689
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Cohen_v._California dbr:Virginia_v._Black dbr:Supreme_Court_of_Ohio dbr:Nigger dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbr:Whitney_v._California dbr:Ohio dbr:First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Kunz_v._New_York dbc:History_of_racism_in_Ohio dbr:Ohio_District_Courts_of_Appeal dbr:Jews dbc:Ku_Klux_Klan dbc:United_States_Free_Speech_Clause_case_law dbr:LexisNexis dbr:Freedom_of_speech dbr:Masses_Publishing_Co._v._Patten dbr:Yates_v._United_States dbr:Smith_Act dbr:Stare_decisis dbr:C-SPAN dbr:Advocacy dbr:US_Supreme_Court n19:construe dbr:Chaplinsky_v._New_Hampshire dbr:Sacher_v._United_States dbr:Vietnam_War dbr:Bad_tendency dbr:Bible dbr:Symbolic_speech dbr:Caucasian_race dbc:1969_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Draft-card_burning dbr:Hamilton_County,_Ohio dbr:Louis_Brandeis dbr:Hugo_Black dbr:R.A.V._v._City_of_St._Paul dbr:United_States_v._O'Brien dbr:Marketplace_of_ideas dbr:Abrams_v._United_States dbc:American_Civil_Liberties_Union_litigation dbr:Schenck_v._United_States n23:_Historic_Supreme_Court_Decisions dbr:William_O._Douglas dbr:Abe_Fortas dbr:First_Red_Scare dbr:Independence_Day_(United_States) dbr:Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater dbr:Korematsu_v._United_States dbr:Hess_v._Indiana dbr:Learned_Hand dbr:Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Terminiello_v._Chicago dbr:Ohio_Courts_of_Common_Pleas dbr:Cincinnati dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions_that_overrule_a_prior_Supreme_Court_decision dbr:United_States_Constitution dbc:Hate_speech_case_law dbr:List_of_landmark_court_decisions_in_the_United_States dbr:Feiner_v._New_York dbr:United_States_Congress dbr:Lawyers'_Edition dbr:Terrorism dbr:Threatening_the_president_of_the_United_States dbr:Oliver_Wendell_Holmes,_Jr. dbr:Second_impeachment_trial_of_Donald_Trump dbr:Sabotage dbr:Lyndon_B._Johnson dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases,_volume_395 dbr:Criminal_syndicalism dbr:National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie dbr:William_J._Brennan_Jr. dbr:Per_curiam dbr:Clear_and_present_danger dbr:Ku_Klux_Klan dbr:Imminent_lawless_action dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Warren_Court dbr:Dennis_v._United_States dbr:Gitlow_v._New_York
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n17:USSC_CR_0395_0444_ZO.html n18:case.html n22:492 n29:Brandenburg-v-Ohio n9:scholar_case%3Fcase=15538842772335942956&q=brandenburg+v+ohio&hl=en&as_sdt=6,36 n28: n31:usrep395444.pdf n21:getcase.pl%3Fcourt=us&vol=395&invol=444
owl:sameAs
freebase:m.01g1k_ dbpedia-cs:Brandenburg_vs._Ohio dbpedia-zh:布兰登伯格诉俄亥俄州案 yago-res:Brandenburg_v._Ohio n25:4bxA3 wikidata:Q4956667 dbpedia-ja:ブランデンバーグ対オハイオ州事件
dbp:subsequent
None
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Ussc dbt:Reflist dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Cn dbt:US1stAmendment dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Quote dbt:Rp dbt:'s dbt:' dbt:Div_col dbt:Div_col_end
dbp:lawsapplied
U.S. Const. amends. I, XIV; Ohio Rev. Code § 2923.13
dbp:oyez
n22:492
dbp:parallelcitations
172800.0
dbp:prior
Defendant convicted, Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County, Ohio, ; affirmed without opinion, Court of Appeals of the First Appellate District of Ohio, ; appeal dismissed without opinion, Supreme Court of Ohio ; probable jurisdiction noted, .
dbp:uspage
444
dbp:usvol
395
dbp:arguedate
0001-02-27
dbp:argueyear
1969
dbp:case
Brandenburg v. Ohio,
dbp:courtlistener
n28:
dbp:decidedate
0001-06-08
dbp:decideyear
1969
dbp:findlaw
n21:getcase.pl%3Fcourt=us&vol=395&invol=444
dbp:fullname
Clarence Brandenburg v. State of Ohio
dbp:holding
Ohio's criminal syndicalism statute violated the First Amendment, as applied to the state through the Fourteenth, because it broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence rather than the constitutionally unprotected incitement to imminent lawless action.
dbp:justia
n18:case.html
dbp:litigants
Brandenburg v. Ohio
dbp:loc
n31:usrep395444.pdf
dbo:abstract
布兰登伯格诉俄亥俄州案（英語：Brandenburg v. Ohio），395 U.S. 444 (1969)，是美国最高法院具有里程碑意义的案件，法院根據美國憲法第一修正案裁定，政府不得惩罚發表煽动性言论的人，除非该人發表的言论“煽动他人立即實施违法行為”，而且该煽动性言論的确可能会造成他人立即犯罪。美國最高法院否决了俄亥俄州的《组织犯罪防治法》，《组织犯罪防治法》禁止任何人發表有關犯罪、破坏、暴力或其他恐怖手段的言論。 Brandenburg v. Ohio 395 U.S. 444 (1969) je jeden z případů amerického Nejvyššího soudu, které formovaly americkou ústavu. Určil hranice svobody projevu ve Spojených státech amerických. ブランデンバーグ対オハイオ州事件（ブランデンバーグたいオハイオしゅうじけん、Brandenburg v. Ohio）395 U.S. 444 (1969)は、アメリカ合衆国連邦最高裁判所が、 アメリカ合衆国憲法修正第1条に関するランドマーク的な判決を言い渡した事件。裁判所は、その表現が「差し迫った違法行為を唱道するか、またはそのような行為を生ぜしめる可能性が高い場合」でない限り、その表現者を処罰することは出来ないと判決した。この判決により、裁判所はオハイオ州の犯罪サンディカリズム法が暴力の単なるアドボカシーを過度に広範に禁じているとして、その法律を無効にした。 Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action". Specifically, the Court struck down Ohio's criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence. In the process, Whitney v. California (1927) was explicitly overruled, and Schenck v. United States (1919), Abrams v. United States (1919), Gitlow v. New York (1925), and Dennis v. United States (1951). were effectively overturned.
dbp:concurrence
Black Douglas
dbp:cornell
n17:USSC_CR_0395_0444_ZO.html
dbp:googlescholar
n9:scholar_case%3Fcase=15538842772335942956&q=brandenburg+v+ohio&hl=en&as_sdt=6,36
dbp:overturnedPreviousCase
Whitney v. California, Schenck v. United States, Dennis v. United States
dbp:percuriam
yes
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Brandenburg_v._Ohio?oldid=1121848689&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
20189
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Brandenburg_v._Ohio