The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Granted: Monday, March 10, 2003
Argument: Tuesday, October 7, 2003
Decision: Wednesday, January 14, 2004
Issues: Federalism, Natural Resources, Miscellaneous

Advocates

R. Edward Cruz (argued the cause for Respondents)
Susan Finkelstein Zinn (argued the cause for Petitioners)

Facts of the Case

In 1996, Linda Frew and other citizens settled a class-action lawsuit in federal district court against the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. Settlement was reached through a consent agree, in which the parties make an agreement that is subject to court supervision. As part of this consent decree, Texas was supposed to improve health care for poor children to comply with a federally mandated program called Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment. Two years later, Frew and others remained unsatisfied that Texas was complying with the federal requirements, and asked the court to force Texas to create a plan for how it would improve health care. Texas refused, however, claiming that it was immune from the court order under the 11th Amendment, which provides for state sovereignty. Texas argued that because no federal rights had been violated, suit could not be brought in federal court. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Texas.

Question

Do states forfeit 11th Amendment protection when they enter into a consent decree under federal law in federal court? And must states violate federal law, not just the consent agreement, in order to be subject to suit in federal court?

Conclusion

Yes and no. In a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Court held that enforcement of the consent decree does not violate the 11th Amendment. The state officials waived 11th Amendment immunity when they asked the court to approve the consent decree. The Court rejected the argument that a federal court cannot enforce a consent decree unless it finds a violation of federal law. "The decree here is a federal court order that springs from a federal dispute and furthers the objectives of federal law," Justice Kennedy wrote.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 9 votes for Frew, 0 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Amendment 11: Eleventh Amendment
Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Wrote the majority opinion
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer
Full Opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Frew v. Hawkins, 540 U.S. 431 (2004),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2003/2003_02_628/>
(last visited ).