United States v. Georgia

Media Items
Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Opinion Announcement
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Paul D. Clement (argued the cause for Petitioner in No. 04-1203)
Gregory A. Castanias (argued the cause for Respondents)
Gregory Andrew Castanias (argued the cause for Respondents)
Samuel R. Bagenstos (argued the cause for Petitioner in No. 04-1236)
Gene C. Schaerr (argued the cause for Respondents)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
04-1203
Petitioner: 
United States
Respondent: 
Georgia, et al.
Consolidation: 
Goodman v. Georgia et al., No. 04-1236
Opinion: 
546 U.S. ___ (2006)

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, United States v. Georgia , 546 U.S. ___ (2006)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2005/2005_04_1203)
Facts of the Case: 

Goodman, a paraplegic held in a Georgia state prison, sued Georgia in federal court for maintaining prison conditions that allegedly discriminated against disabled people and violated Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Georgia claimed the 11th Amendment provided the state immunity from such suits. The district court ruled for Georgia, but the 11th Circuit reversed.

Before the 11th Circuit ruled in the case, the United States sued Georgia, arguing that the ADA's Title II abolished state sovereign immunity from monetary suits. Congress could do this, the U.S. argued, by exercising its 14th Amendment power to enforce equal protection.

Question: 

Did Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 validly abrogate state sovereign immunity for suits by prisoners with disabilities challenging discrimination by state prisons? Was Title II a proper exercise of Congress's power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, as applied to the administration of prison systems?

Conclusion: 

Yes and yes. In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court ruled that Title II abrogates sovereign immunity in cases where violations of the 8th Amendment are alleged. The 14th Amendment incorporates the 8th Amendment (that is, applies it to the states). Congress can enforce the 14th Amendment against the states "by creating private remedies against the States for actual violations" of its provisions, which can involve abrogating state sovereign immunity. However, the Court did not address the question of whether Title II validly abrogates sovereign immunity when the 8th Amendment is not involved.

Decisions

Decision: 9 votes for United States, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Roberts
Wrote a regular concurrence
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Wrote the majority opinion
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the majority, joined Stevens' concurrence
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer

Full Opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia