Appellate Section - Constitutionality of Federal Statutes

Briefs and Opinions

• Barnett v. Raoul (7th Cir.) – Amicus

  • The Act violates the Second Amendment by banning AR-15s and other firearms that are in common use by law-abiding citizens for lawful reasons
  • Text, history, and precedent confirm that a legislature may not ban a class of weapons on the ground that the weapons are “militaristic”
  • The Act violates the Second Amendment by banning the possession of magazines and other firearm attachments that are in common use by law-abiding citizens for lawful reasons

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	06/13/25

• King v. Marion County Circuit Court (S. Ct., 7th Cir.) – Intervenor and Amicus

  • Eleventh Amendment immunity does not bar King’s Title II claim because Congress abrogated sovereign immunity
  • The district court correctly concluded that Marion Circuit Court violated Title II
  • Marion Circuit Court is subject to compensatory damages for intentional discrimination

   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 138 S. Ct. 1582 (United States Waived Response to the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari)	04/16/18
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 868 F.3d 589	08/18/17
  Brief as Intervenor and Amicus	02/17/17

• Ruby J. v. Jefferson County Board of Education (N.D. Ala.) – Intervenor

  • The Eleventh Amendment is not a bar to the plaintiffs' IDEA claims because the county board of education is not an arm of the State, and Alabama waived its sovereign immunity when it accepted federal IDEA funds
  • Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity in Section 1403 of the IDEA as part of its enforcement authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Decision, reported at 122 F.Supp.3d 1288	08/17/15
  Brief as Intervenor	02/25/15

• Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama and Alabama Democratic Conference v. Alabama (S. Ct.) - Amicus

  • The court erred in its analysis when it concluded that strict scrutiny does not apply to the redistricting plans because the court failed to scrutinize each challenged district to determine whether race predominated over traditional districting principles
  • The court further erred in concluding that, even assuming strict scrutiny applied, the legislature's consideration of race was justified by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, because the court misconstrued Section 5 as barring any districting change that reduces the percentage of minorities in a majority-minority district
  • If the district court on remand concludes that strict scrutiny should apply to a particular district, the court must determine whether the legislature's consideration of race in such district was narrowly tailored to achieve compliance with Sections 2 and 5 of the Voting Rights Act, as properly interpreted

   

  Document	Date
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 135 S. Ct. 1257	03/25/15
  Brief as Amicus	08/20/14

• United States v. Miller, et al. (6th Cir.) - Appellee

  • The Court should grant en banc review because the panel's interpretation and application of Section 249(a)(2) are incorrect and exceptionally important
  • Section 249(a)(2) is constitutional on its face and as applied under Congress's Commerce Clause power
  • Defendants' arguments lack merit

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Order	11/20/14
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	10/10/14
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 767 F.3d 585	08/27/14
  Brief as Appellee	02/28/14

• Hatch v. United States (S. Ct.) - Respondent

  • The court of appeals correctly rejected Hatch's arguments
  • There is no basis for the Court to review well-settled law that the Jones analysis applies in the Thirteenth Amendment context

   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 134 S. Ct. 1538	03/24/14
  Opposition to Certiorari	02/07/14

• Texas v. Holder (S. Ct.) – Appellee

  • The Court should hold the case pending a decision in Shelby County v. Holder, No. 12-96 (S. Ct.)
  • If the Court upholds Sections 4(b) and 5 of the VRA, it should summarily affirm the district court's decision because the court properly applied Section 5 and correctly concluded that S.B. 14 would have a retrogressive effect

   

  Document	Date
  Granted, Vacated, and Remanded for Further Consideration in Light of Shelby County v. Holder, No. 12-96 (reported at 133 S. Ct. 2612 (June 25, 2013)), reported at 133 S. Ct. 2886	06/27/13
  Motion to Affirm	05/09/13

• House v. United States (S. Ct.) – Respondent

  • The Eleventh Circuit's application of the harmless error standard in this context does not conflict with Supreme Court precedent or other circuit authority, and that its conclusion that the error was harmless as to the four Section 242 counts that were upheld was correct

   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 133 S. Ct. 1633	03/25/13
  Brief in Opposition	02/22/13

• United States v. New Orleans (5th Cir.) - Plaintiff/Appellee

  • The City has not shown it is likely to prevail on appeal or that it will suffer irreparable harm without a stay, and that the interests of the United States and the public interest will be harmed if implementation of the consent decree is delayed
  • The would-be intervenors have not met the criteria for intervention as of right
  • The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying their motions for permissive intervention

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Order	06/05/13
  Opposition to Motion for Stay	06/03/13
  Brief as Appellee	02/19/13

• United States v. Cannon, et al. (5th Cir.) - Appellee

  • The court of appeals' decision was correct and does not conflict with other courts of appeals' decisions
  • The Supreme Court's decisions in City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997) (addressing Congress's power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment), and Shelby County v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 2612 (2013) (addressing Congress's power to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment), do not affect Congress's power to enforce the Thirteenth Amendment
  • The decision in Shelby County has no bearing on Congress's power under Section 2 of the Thirteenth Amendment; the decision did not address or disturb the Supreme Court's longstanding line of cases addressing Congress's power under Section 2 to address and proscribe badges and incidents of slavery
  • The rationale of Shelby County is inapplicable to the far more limited, and very different, legislation enforcing the Thirteenth Amendment, and that neither the "equal sovereignty" concerns, nor broader federalism concerns, expressed in Shelby County have relevance to legislation enforcing the Thirteenth Amendment that proscribes private, race-based violent conduct
  • Given the scope of Congress's power under Section 2 of the Thirteenth Amendment, and Section 249's legislative history, Congress had ample authority to enact Section 249(a)(1) and prohibit racially-motivated violent conduct as a badge or incident of slavery
  • The evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions

   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 135 S. Ct. 709	12/01/14
  Brief in Opposition to Certiorari	10/29/14
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 750 F.3d 492	04/24/14
  Supplemental Brief	08/26/13
  Brief as Appellee	02/15/13

• Glenn v. Holder (S. Ct.) – Respondent

  • The Sixth Circuit's decision, holding that the plaintiffs had not alleged an intent to violate the Act, nor presented any evidence that they would be prosecuted or suffer other adverse enforcement action under the Act, was correct

   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 133 S. Ct. 1581	03/18/13
  Brief in Opposition	02/04/13

• Gilmore v. Mississippi Coast Coliseum Commission (S.D. Miss.) – Intervenor

  • Plaintiff has sufficiently pleaded a Section 504 claim
  • The court does not need to decide the Title II constitutional question now; in any event, Title II validly abrogates Eleventh Amendment immunity in this context

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Order, available at 2013 WL 1194706	03/22/13
  Brief as Intervenor	02/01/13

• DynaLantic Corp. v. Department of Defense (D.C. Cir.) – Appellants/Cross-Appellees

  • Section 1981 does not apply to the federal government based on the doctrine of sovereign immunity and the plain language of the statute

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Order, available at 2014 WL 812829	02/04/14
  Reply in Support of Motion for Partial Summary Affirmance	02/04/13
  Motion for Partial Summary Affirmance	01/02/13

• Gaylor v. Georgia Department of Natural Resources (N.D. Ga.) – Intervenor/Amicus

  • Title II properly abrogates state sovereign immunity where it ensures accessible public facilities
  • The requirements of Title II and Section 504 are enforceable in a suit for injunctive relief pursuant to the Ex Parte Young doctrine
  • Regulations authoritatively construing Title II and Section 504 are enforceable under those statutes' private rights of action

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Order, available at 2013 WL 4790158	09/06/13
  Brief as Intervenor and Amicus	11/13/12

• Texas v. Holder (D.D.C.) – Defendant

  • Congress appropriately exercised its enforcement authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments when it reauthorized Sections 4(b) and 5 in 2006
  • Section 5's effects prong is valid prophylactic legislation
  • Section 5 does not violate equal protection principles
  • Section 5 is not unconstitutionally vague

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Order	12/17/12
  Reply Brief	11/13/12
  Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and Brief in Opposition to Texas's Motion for Summary Judgment	10/22/12

• Weaver v. Madison City Board of Education, et al. (N.D. Ala. and 11th Cir.) - Intervenor-Appellee

  • The Board is not an arm of the state under the relevant constitutional standard
  • In the alternative, USERRA provides only for state court jurisdiction over private USERRA suits against States and accordingly, if the Board is an arm of the state, the case should be dismissed on statutory grounds
  • If the court reaches the issue, it should hold that Congress has the authority under its War Powers to authorize private USERRA suits against state employers

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 771 F.3d 748	11/04/14
  Brief as Intervenor-Appellee	03/14/14
  District Court Decision and Order, available at 2013 WL 4433799	08/14/13
  Response to Objections to Magistrates's Report and Recommendation	07/12/13
  District Court Decision, reported at 947 F. Supp. 2d 1308	05/29/13
  Brief as Intervenor	10/04/12

• Shelby County v. Holder (S. Ct.) – Respondent

  • The decision of the court of appeals is consistent with Northwest Austin and the Court's cases applying congruence and proportionality review
  • No further review of the ruling is warranted

   

  Document	Date
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 133 S. Ct. 2612	06/25/13
  Brief for the Federal Respondent	01/25/13
  Certiorari Granted, reported at 133 S. Ct. 594	11/09/12
  Brief in Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari	09/24/12

• Nix v. Holder (S. Ct.) – Respondent

  • This case is moot
  • Any further merits review is not warranted
  • This case is a poor vehicle for resolving the constitutional claim
  • The district court's merits judgment is correct

   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 133 S. Ct. 610	11/13/12
  Brief in Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari	09/24/12

• United States v. Hatch (10th Cir.) – Appellee

  • Given the scope of the Congress's power under Section 2 of the Thirteenth Amendment, and Section 249's legislative history, Congress had ample authority to enact Section 249(a)(1) and prohibit racially-motivated violent conduct as a badge or incident of slavery

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 722 F.3d 1193	07/03/13
  Brief as Appellee	07/25/12

• Johnson v. Neiman (8th Cir.) – Intervenor

  • The appellate court should consider whether Johnson's Title II claim fails for the same evidentiary reasons as his Eighth Amendment claim, in which case the court need not reach the constitutional question
  • Title II validly abrogates sovereign immunity in the prison context

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 504 F. App'x 543	05/06/13
  Brief as Intervenor	07/23/12

• State of Florida v. United States (D.D.C.) – Defendant

  • Shelby County upheld the 2006 Reauthorization of Sections 4(B) and 5 as a valid exercise of Congress's enforcement authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments
  • The protection of language minorities under Section 5 was a valid exercise of Congress's Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendment enforcement authority and remains so today
  • Requiring preclearance as to each of Section 5's protected groups is a congruent and proportional response to the harm targeted in covered jurisdictions
  • The 2006 amendments to Section 5 are constitutional
  • Requiring covered jurisdictions in non-covered states to obtain preclearance for statewide voting changes does not exceed Congress's enforcement authority

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Order	10/16/12
  District Court Decision	08/16/12
  Reply Brief	07/20/12
  Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and In Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment	06/25/12
  Motion for Summary Judgment	06/25/12

• Paulone v. City of Frederick (D. Md.) – Intervenor

  • In the context of policing, pretrial detention, and parole supervision, Title II is valid legislation pursuant to Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment and so can abrogate sovereign immunity

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Order	06/04/12
  Reply Brief	05/25/12
  Brief as Intervenor	04/23/12

• McDonald v. Pennsylvania State Police (3d Cir. and W.D. Pa.) – Intervenor

  • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation in cases involving licensing, including professional licensing

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Decision, available at 2012 WL 5381403	10/31/12
  Brief as Intervenor	09/10/12
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 485 F. App'x 512	06/22/12
  Brief as Intervenor	03/30/12

• McBay v. City of Decatur (N.D. Ala.) – Intervenor/Amicus

  • Plaintiffs have adequately pleaded violations of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
  • Title II is valid Section 5 legislation to the extent that it ensures accessible public facilities
  • Title II is valid Commerce Clause legislation
  • Justice Department regulations are enforceable under Title II's authoritatively construing Title II private right of action
  • Title II regulates only current economic activity and that National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012), therefore has no application here

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Decision	04/11/14
  Response to Supplemental Authority	09/27/12
  Brief as Intervenor and Amicus	01/27/12

• Mary Jo C. v. New York State and Local Retirement System (2d Cir.) – Amicus/Intervenor

  • Title II's abrogation of sovereign immunity is valid as applied to the class of cases involving the receipt of public benefits
  • A state law that precludes a public entity from making a reasonable accommodation is preempted

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 707 F.3d 144	01/30/13
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	01/11/12
  Brief as Amicus and Intervenor	08/29/11

• Mason, et al. v. City of Huntsville (N.D. Ala.) – Intervenor/Amicus

  • Title II is constitutional legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause
  • Regulations implementing Title II are enforceable in a private suit
  • Provision of sidewalks and streets is a "service"
  • Plaintiffs did not fail to state a Section 504 claim
  • Title II regulates only current economic activity and that National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012), therefore has no application here

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Decision, available at 2012 WL 4815518	10/10/12
  Response to Supplemental Authority	09/27/12
  Brief as Intervenor and Amicus	06/10/11

• Natarelli v. VESID (2d Cir.) – Intervenor

  • The district court failed to apply the procedure set forth by the Supreme Court in United States v. Georgia, 546 U.S. 151 (2006), for addressing Eleventh Amendment questions relating to Title II of the ADA and accordingly, did not conduct the proper analysis with respect to this issue

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 420 F. App'x 53	04/20/11
  Brief as Intervenor	03/16/11

• LaRoque v. Holder (D.C. Cir.) – Appellee

  • Plaintiffs lack standing to challenge Section 5(c)
  • The district court correctly upheld the constitutionality of the Amendments and of the 2006 Reauthorization
  • Lack of jurisdiction
  • Plaintiffs lacked standing and that they failed to state a viable cause of action

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 679 F.3d 905	05/18/12
  Brief as Appellee	02/13/12
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 650 F.3d 777	07/08/11
  Brief as Appellee	03/07/11

• Zied-Campbell v. Richman (3d Cir.) – Intervenor

  • The district court erred in reaching the Eleventh Amendment issue, and its ruling on that issue therefore should be vacated
  • In the alternative, if the court of appeals reaches the merits of the Eleventh Amendment issue, it should reverse the ruling of the district court and hold that the abrogation of Eleventh Amendment immunity is valid in the context of social services

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 428 F. App'x 224	05/24/11
  Brief as Intervenor	02/10/11

• Glenn v. Holder (6th Cir.) – Appellee

  • Plaintiffs challenge the constitutionality of Section 249(a)(2) of the Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act
  • The district court ruled that plaintiffs' claims are not ripe because their claims of injury are entirely speculative
  • The district court dismissed the complaint under Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of jurisdiction, ruling that plaintiffs lack standing because they did not allege that they intend to engage in any conduct that might violate the statute or subject them to prosecution

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 690 F.3d 417	08/02/12
  Brief as Appellee	01/21/11

• Kilroy v. Maine (1st Cir.) – Intervenor

  • The court of appeals certified to the Attorney General that the case involved a constitutional challenge to a federal statute, and the Division therefore intervened to address the Eleventh Amendment issue on appeal

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, unpublished	03/08/11
  Brief as Intervenor	10/13/10

• McCollum v. Owensboro Community and Technical College (W.D. Ky.) – Intervenor 

  • The ADA’s retaliation ban helps to enforce Title II, which itself is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation that abrogates sovereign immunity
  • The retaliation ban also enforces the First Amendment rights of public employees, and so is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation regardless of the validity of the underlying ADA rights

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Decision, available at 2010 WL 5393852	12/22/10
  Reply Brief as Intervenor	09/14/10
  Brief as Intervenor	08/17/10

• Goodman v. Donald (S.D. Ga.) – Intervenor

  • The ADA’s bar on retaliation validly abrogates the State’s sovereign immunity

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	07/27/10

• Miller v. Donald (S.D. Ga.) – Intervenor 

  • The ADA’s bar on retaliation validly abrogates the State’s sovereign immunity
  • The Division also filed as an amicus curiae arguing that the Title II right of action extends to challenges based on the implementing regulations

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	07/21/10

• Disability Rights New Jersey, Inc. v. Velez (D.N.J.) – Intervenor

  • Defendants seek summary judgment based in part on Eleventh Amendment grounds, but the Eleventh Amendment is not a bar in this case

   

  Document	Date
  Order Regarding Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment, available at 2010 WL 3862536	09/24/10
  Brief as Intervenor	05/24/10

• Hale v. King (5th Cir. and S.D. Miss.) – Intervenor

  • The Division intervened in this appeal to defend the constitutionality of the ADA provision abrogating states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims brought pursuant to Title II
  • The court of appeals held that Title II does not validly abrogate Eleventh Amendment immunity in the context of prison educational and work programs because it is not a congruent and proportional response to the harm the statute remedies. The Division argued that it was improper to decide the constitutional question first and asked the Fifth Circuit to rehear that decision to rule on the constitutional question first

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Order	01/15/13
  Brief as Intervenor	08/13/12
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 642 F.3d 492	05/26/11
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	12/01/10
  Petition for Panel Rehearing	12/01/10
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 624 F.3d 178	10/14/10
  Brief as Intervenor	04/09/10

• Brockman v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, et al. (5th Cir.) – Intervenor

  • The Division intervened in this appeal to defend the constitutionality of the ADA provision abrogating states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims brought pursuant to Title II

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 397 F. App'x 18	09/30/10
  Brief as Intervenor (note: brief was submitted to the court, but utlimately not filed by the court)	03/29/10

• Guttman v. Khalsa -- (D.N.M. & 10th Cir.) – Intervenor

  • The ADA validly abrogates States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims brought pursuant to Title II in the context of public licensing

   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	04/30/12
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	02/27/12
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 669 F.3d 1101	01/11/12
  Reply Brief as Appellant/Intervenor	01/10/11
  Brief as Appellant/Intervenor	10/22/10
  Memorandum Opinion and Order	03/31/10
  Brief as Intervenor	12/04/09

• New Jersey Protection & Advocacy, Inc. v. Velez (D.N.J.) – Intervenor

  • Sovereign immunity is not a bar in this case

   

  Document	Date
  Memorandum and Order	07/23/09
  Brief as Intervenor	06/29/09

• Zibbell v. Granholm (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • The Division intervened in this appeal to defend the constitutionality of the ADA provision abrogating states' Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims brought pursuant to Title II

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 313 F. App'x 843	02/23/09
  Brief as Intervenor	09/03/08

• Day v. Minnesota (8th Cir/S. Ct.) -- Intervenor

  • The Division intervened in this appeal in order to defend the constitutionality of the ADA provision abrogating states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity for claims brought pursuant to Title II

   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 131 S. Ct. 818	12/13/10
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 354 F. App’x 272	11/05/09
  Brief as Intervenor	08/28/08

• Chase v. Baskerville (4th Cir) -- Appellee

  • Congress acted appropriately when it enacted Title II and its abrogation provision (as applied in the prison context), as well as Section 504 and the statutory provisions that condition the receipt of federal funds on a State’s waiver of its Eleventh Amendment immunity
  • The court should not reach the question of Title II’s constitutionality because Section 504 provides an essentially identical remedy to the plaintiff, and the Fourth Circuit has already held that state agencies have no immunity to Section 504 claims
  • The State waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 claims when it accepted federal financial assistance

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 305 F. App'x 135	12/31/08
  Informal Brief as Appellee	08/11/08

• McIntosh v. Partridge (5th Cir) -- Intervenor

  • Congress did not grant federal courts jurisdiction to hear private USERRA claims against state employers
  • Congress has the authority pursuant to its war powers to subject state employers to private USERRA claims

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 540 F.3d 315	08/08/08
  Brief as Intervenor	11/16/07

• Goodman v. Donald (S.D. Ga.) -- Intervenor

  • This court should avoid deciding the constitutionality of Title II of the ADA
  • Congress validly abrogated States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	11/09/07

• Miller v. Johnson (E.D. Va.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly abrogated States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	10/25/07

• United States & Spencer v. Earley (4th Cir) -- Intervenor-Appellant

  • The district court erred in reaching the question of Title II’s constitutionality
  • The district court erred in dismissing Spencer’s claims on the basis of Eleventh Amendment immunity
  • This court should avoid deciding a new constitutional question
  • Should this court reach the question, it should hold that Congress validly abrogated States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA, as applied in the prison context

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 278 F. App'x 254	05/16/08
  Reply Brief	12/14/07
  Brief as Appellant	11/02/07

• Haas v. Quest Recovery Services (6th Cir) -- Intervenor

  • In light of this Court’s holding that plaintiffs have not stated valid Title II claims against the State, this Court’s subsequent conclusion that the State is immune to plaintiffs’ Title II claims is in contravention of the Supreme Court’s instructions in Georgia and should not be reinstated

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 247 F. App'x 670	08/24/07
  Letter Brief as Intervenor	04/18/07

• Large v. Fremont County (D. Wy.) -- Intervenor

  • The Supreme Court has previously rejected a similar constitutional challenge to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act
  • Congress has broad powers to enact prophylactic and remedial legislation prohibiting some constitutional conduct when the legislation is congruent and proportional to the constitutional injury to be prevented or remedied
  • Section 2 is a valid exercise of Congress’s constitutional authority to enforce the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments
  • Courts of appeals have rejected similar constitutional challenges to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	01/16/07

• Welch v. Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University (W.D. Va.) -- Intervenor

  • The Fourth Circuit has already held that Title II validly abrogates States' immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA in the context of public higher education
  • The Fourth Circuit has also held that a state agency validly waives its Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Section 504 when it accepts federal financial assistance

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	01/19/07

• Chase v. Baskerville (E.D. Va.) -- Intervenor

  • This court should not reach the validity of Title II's abrogation
  • Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act is valid Section 5 legislation as applied to prison administration
  • As the Fourth Circuit has held, state agencies validly waive their Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Section 504 when they accept federal financial assistance

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Decision, unpublished	08/02/07
  Brief as Intervenor	01/19/07

• Buchanan v. Maine (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • This court should not reach the constitutionality of Title II unless necessary
  • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of the provision of mental health services

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 469 F.3d 158	11/16/06
  Brief as Amicus	08/30/06

• Westchester Day School v. Village of Mamaroneck (2d Cir.) -- Intervenor & Amicus

  • The district court correctly upheld the constitutionality of RLUIPA
  • The district court properly concluded that defendants substantially burdened plaintiff’s religious exercise, and failed to demonstrate that the substantial burden was imposed to further a compelling governmental interest in the least restrictive manner

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor and Amicus	08/11/06

• Guru Nanak Sikh Society v. County of Sutter (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor/Amicus

  • The district court correctly found that the county's denial of Guru Nanak's application for a use permit constituted a substantial burden in violation of Section 2 (a)(1) of RLUIPA
  • RLUIPA Section 2(a)(1), as made applicable by Section 2(a)(2)(c), is a valid exercise of Congress's Section 5 powers because it codifies established constitutional principles

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 456 F.3d 978	08/01/06
  Brief as Intervenor and Amicus	05/19/04

• Disability Rights Council v. WMATA (D.D.C.) -- Intervenor

  • This court should not reach this issue
  • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied to the context of public transportation

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Decision, reported at 239 F.R.D. 9	12/09/06
  Brief as Intervenor	07/17/06

• Prye v. Blunt (W.D. Mo.) -- Intervenor

  • This court should not reach the constitutionality of Title II unless necessary
  • Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act is valid Section 5 legislation as applied to voting

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	06/15/06

• Jones v. Gale (8th Cir.) -- Amicus

  • This court has held that private plaintiffs may enforce the requirements of Title II of the ADA through Ex Parte Young suits

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 470 F.3d 1261	12/13/06
  Brief as Amicus	05/25/06

• Spencer v. Earley (E.D. Va.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act is valid Section 5 legislation as applied to prison administration
  • As the Fourth Circuit has held, state agencies validly waive their Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Section 504 when they accept federal financial assistance

   

  Document	Date
  District Court Decision	01/30/07
  Brief as Intervenor	04/14/06

• Randolph v. Texas Rehabilitation Commission (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • This en banc court has held that a state agency waives its Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act when it accepts federal financial assistance

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 214 F. App'x 424	01/18/07
  Brief as Intervenor	10/11/05

• Klingler v. Department of Revenue (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • The constitutionality of Title II and its regulations is no longer at issue in this case

   

  Document	Date
  Supplemental Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 455 F.3d 888	07/07/06
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 433 F.3d 1078	01/17/06
  Brief as Intervenor	08/31/05

• Toledo v. Sanchez-Rivera (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Under the analysis of Tennessee v. Lane, Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of public education

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 454 F.3d 24	07/06/06
  Brief as Intervenor	08/25/05

• Roe v. Johnson (2d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • This Court should not rule on the constitutionality of Title II without first considering alternative grounds for affirming or reversing
  • Under the analysis of Tennessee v. Lane, Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of public licensing programs

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	03/14/05

• Constantine v. Rectors & Visitors of George Mason University ( 4th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • This court should decide first whether plaintiff stated a claim prior to entertaining the university's constitutional challenges
  • Congress validly conditioned federal funding on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
  • Under the analysis of Tennessee v. Lane, Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of public education
  • The ADA retaliation provision is also valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation
  • The Eleventh Amendment is no bar to private suits against state officials in their official capacities to enjoin future violations of Title II and Section 504

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 411 F.3d 474	06/13/05
  Brief as Intervenor	12/08/04

• Bill M. v. Nebraska Department of Health & Human Services (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • The district court properly declined to rule on the State's Eleventh Amendment challenge at this stage in the proceedings
  • Congress validly abrogated the State's Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under Title II of the ADA in the institutionalization context
  • The panel incorrectly concluded that this court's 1999 holding in Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle controls the outcome of this case

   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc as Intervenor	07/08/05
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 408 F.3d 1096	05/27/05
  Brief as Intervenor	11/26/04

• Crowley v. TEA (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • This court should delay consideration of this case pending this court's en banc decision in Pace v. Bogalusa
  • A State that voluntarily seeks entry of a consent decree in federal court waives its immunity from actions to enforce that decree the TEA waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity to claims under the IDEA by accepting IDEA funding

   

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	07/12/05
  Brief as Intervenor	11/12/04

• Guttman v. Khalsa (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Under the analysis of Tennessee v. Lane, Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of public licensing programs

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 446 F.3d 1027	04/19/06
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 401 F.3d 1170	03/17/05
  Brief as Intervenor	09/10/04

• Cochran v. New Jersey Department of Corrections (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied to the class of cases implicating prisoners' rights

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision	02/28/06
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc as Intervenor	05/27/05
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 401 F.3d 184	03/15/05
  Brief as Intervenor	07/08/04

• Muhammed v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor-Appellee

  • Title VII's prohibition of religious discrimination, including its accommodation requirement, is valid Section 5 legislation

   

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	01/06/05
  Brief as Intervenor-Appellee	03/08/04

• Miller v. King (11th Cir. and S.D. Ga.) -- Intervenor

  • This panel should delay consideration of the State's Eleventh Amendment challenge to Title II pending resolution of the same challenge by the Supreme Court in Tennessee v. Lane and by other panels of this Court already considering the same issue
  • The Eleventh Amendment is no bar to private suits against state officials in their official capacities to enjoin future violations of Title II of the Disabilities Act
  • Title II of the ADA is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied to the class of cases implicating prisoners' rights

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	05/28/08
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 449 F.3d 1149	05/17/06
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc as Intervenor	10/28/04
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 384 F.3d 1248	09/14/04
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	06/25/04
  Brief as Intervenor	02/10/04

• Midrash Sephardi, Inc. v. Town of Surfside (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • The RLUIPA sections at issue are a valid exercise of Congress's authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment and under the Commerce Clause
  • RLUIPA Sections 2(b)(1), 2(b)(3)(B), and 2(a)(1) as made applicable by Section 2(a)(2)(c) are within Congress's Section 5 powers because they codify established constitutional principles
  • Section 2(a)(1), as applied through Section 2(a)(2)(b), is a valid exercise of Congress's Commerce Clause authority
  • The RLUIPA provisions at issue are consistent with the Establishment Clause
  • RLUIPA does not violate the Tenth Amendment

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 366 F.3d 1214	04/21/04
  Brief as Intervenor	01/05/04

• Barbour v. WMATA (D.C. Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 374 F.3d 1161	07/09/04
  Brief as Intervenor	10/26/03

• McCarthy v. Hale (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Suits under Title II may be brought against state officials in their official capacities for prospective relief
  • The constitutionality of Title II and Section 504 affects the merits of plaintiffs' claims, not the Court's jurisdiction under Ex Parte Young to adjudicate the claims
  • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation
  • Title II is valid Commerce Clause legislation
  • Title II does not violate the Tenth Amendment
  • Section 504 is valid Spending Clause legislation

   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied, reported at 391 F.3d 676	11/19/04
  Response to Petition for Rehearing En Banc	09/30/04
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 381 F.3d 407	08/11/04
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	06/15/04
  Brief as Intervenor	10/24/03

• S.C. v. Deptford Board of Education (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly conditioned IDEA funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under the IDEA

   

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	10/20/04
  Brief as Intervenor	08/28/03

• Nieves-Marquez v. Puerto Rico (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Plaintiffs' claims under Title II of the ADA and Section 504 are not barred by the Eleventh Amendment

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 353 F.3d 108	12/24/03
  Brief as Intervenor	08/26/03

• Goodman v. Ray (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Because it combats an enduring problem of unconstitutional mistreatment and discrimination against individuals with disabilities, Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act is valid Section 5 legislation
  • Title II of the ADA is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied to the class of cases implicating prisoners' rights

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 449 F.3d 1152	05/17/06
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 546 U.S. 151	01/10/06
  Reply Brief (merits)	10/27/05
  Brief as Petitioner (merits)	07/29/05
  Reply Brief	04/25/05
  Petition for Writ of Certiorari	03/09/05
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	12/09/04
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc as Intervenor	10/29/04
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 120 F. App'x 785	09/16/04
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	06/25/04
  Brief as Intervenor	05/13/03

• Espinoza v. Texas Department of Public Safety (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress clearly conditioned receipt of federal financial assistance on a state agency's knowing and voluntary waiver of sovereign immunity to private actions under Section 504
  • Section 504 is valid Spending Clause legislation
  • The Department's waiver of sovereign immunity was effective

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 148 F. App'x 224	08/25/05
  Supplemental Letter Brief as Intervenor	04/12/05
  Brief as Intervenor	04/22/03

• Meyers v. Texas (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Suits under Title II may be brought against state officials in their official capacities for prospective relief
  • This Court need not, and should not, consider the State's challenges to the validity of the surcharge regulation in this appeal
  • The surcharge regulation does not exceed the scope of the Attorney General's delegated regulatory authority
  • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation
  • Title II is valid Commerce Clause legislation as applied to this case
  • Title II does not violate the Tenth Amendment

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 410 F.3d 236	05/19/05
  Brief as Intervenor	03/20/03

• Lieberman v. Delaware (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly conditioned a State's receipt of federal funding on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 70 F. App'x 630	07/14/03
  Brief as Intervenor	02/27/03

• Pugliese v. Dillenberg (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly conditioned the receipt of federal financial assistance on the waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
  • The State was not unconstitutionally coerced into waiving its sovereign immunity to Section 504 claims

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 346 F.3d 937	10/07/03
  Reply Brief as Intervenor	05/16/03
  Brief as Intervenor	02/03/03

• Thomas v. University of Houston (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress clearly conditioned receipt of federal funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
  • Section 504 is valid Spending Clause legislation
  • The University's waiver of sovereign immunity was effective

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 155 F. App'x 115	11/04/05
  Supplemental Letter Brief	04/22/05
  Brief as Intervenor	01/29/03

• Gross Seed Co. v. Nebraska Dep't of Roads & United States (8th Cir.) -- Appellees

  • The district court correctly determined that the federal DBE program is facially constitutional
  • The district court correctly determined that the federal DBE program is constitutional as applied

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 345 F.3d 964	10/06/03
  Brief as Appellees	01/10/03

• Danny R. v. Spring Branch Independent School District (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress clearly conditioned receipt of federal funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
  • Section 504 is valid Spending Clause legislation
  • The TEA's authority to solicit and accept federal funds conditioned on a waiver of sovereign immunity is sufficient, as a matter of federal law, to support a waiver of immunity through acceptance of federal funds

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 124 F. App'x 289	03/30/05
  Brief as Intervenor	12/10/02

• Radaszewski v. Garner (8th Cir.) -- Amicus

  • Eleventh Amendment is no nar to rivate suits against state officials to enjoin future violations of federal law
  • Congress did not display any intent to foreclose jurisdiction under Ex parte Young for suits under Title II And Section 504

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 383 F.3d 599	09/08/04
  Brief as Amicus	11/29/02

• George Lane and Beverly Jones v. State of Tennessee (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Under this Court’s holding in Popovich, there is a Due Process basis for applying Title II of the ADA to claims of denial of access to the courts by individuals with disabilities

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision (amended), reported at 315 F.3d 680	01/10/03
  Supplemental Brief On Panel Rehearing For The United States As Intervenor	11/06/02

• Shepard & United States v. Irving (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly conditioned federal funding on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Intervenor	07/14/04
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	01/27/04
  Response to Petition for Rehearing En Banc	11/20/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 77 F. App'x 615	08/20/03
  Brief as Intervenor	10/28/02

• Endres v. Indiana State Police Department & Holmes v. Marion County (7th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Whether, in extending the reach of Title VII to cover state employers, Congress validly abrogated States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity to suits for damages by private parties

   

  Document	Date
  Rehearing Dismissed	01/20/04
  Petition for Rehearing Granted	11/19/03
  Petition for Rehearing as Intervenor	08/08/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 334 F.3d 618	06/27/03
  Brief as Intervenor	07/29/02

• Miranda B., et al. v. John Kitzhabeer, Governor of the State of Oregon, etc. (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Defendants' arguments about the validity of the Federal Statutory provisions regarding regarding their Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit under Title II and Section 504 are foreclosed by binding circuit precedent
  • Suits under Title II and Section 504 may be brought against state officials in their official capacities for prospective relief

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 328 F.3d 1181	05/14/03
  Brief as Intervenor	07/23/02

• Sherbrooke Turf, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Transportation, et al. and United States, et al. (8th Cir.) -- Appellee

  • Sherbrooke has standing to challenge the DBE program
  • District court correctly concluded that recipients of TEA-21 financial assistance need not independemtly satisfy satisfy strict scrutiny
  • District court correctly determined that the federal DBE program is facially constitutional

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 345 F.3d 964	10/06/03
  Brief as Appellee	07/15/02

• Johnson v. Louisisana Dep't of Educ.& August v. Mitchell (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress conditioned receipt of federal funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
  • Section 504 may be enforced against state officials in their official capacities for prospective relief even if congress did not validly condition the receipt of federal financial assistance on a waiver of immunity

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 421 F.3d 342	08/15/05
  Supplemental Letter Brief	04/22/05
  Consolidated Supplemental En Banc Brief for the United States as Intervenor	10/20/03
  Reply to Petition for Rehearing En Banc for the United States as Intervenor	07/09/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 330 F.3d 362	05/05/03
  Consolidated Brief as Intervenor	07/15/02

• A.W. v. Jersey City Public Schools (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 and IDEA suits

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 341 F.3d 234	08/19/03
  Brief as Intervenor	07/03/02

• M.A. & United States v. State-Operated School District of the City of Newark and New Jersey Department of Education, etc. (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor/Appellee

  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 344 F.3d 335	09/16/03
  Brief as Intervenor-Appellee	07/03/02

• Doe v. State of Nebraska (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 345 F.3d 593	10/07/03
  Brief as Intervenor	07/02/02

• Bowers v. NCAA (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits
  • This court should not reach the constitutionality of Title II unless necessary
  • Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied in the context of public education

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 475 F.3d 524	02/01/07
  Brief as Intervenor	08/15/06
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 346 F.3d 402	08/20/03
  Brief as Intervenor	06/28/02

• Bruggeman v. Blagojevich (formerly Boudreau v. Ryan) (7th Cir.) -- Amicus/Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA may be enforced against state officials for prospective relief
  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity for private claims under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing Withdrawn	05/09/03
  Response to Petition for Rehearing En Banc	05/07/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 324 F.3d 906	04/07/03
  Brief as Intervenor	11/25/02
  Brief as Amicus	06/19/02

• Biggs v. Board of Education of Cecile County, Maryland (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits

   

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	01/17/03
  Reply Brief	08/15/02
  Brief as Intervenor	06/14/02

• Miller v. Texas Tech University (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 421 F.3d 342	08/15/05
  Supplemental Letter Brief	04/22/05
  Supplemental En Banc Brief as Intervenor	10/28/03
  Reply to Petition for Rehearing En Banc for the United States as Intervenor	07/09/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 330 F.3d 691	05/13/03
  Brief as Intervenor	06/10/02

• Assoc. of Disabled Americans v. Florida International University (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • As applied to discrimination in education, Title II is congruent and proportional to the constitutional rights at issue and the history of discrimination

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 405 F.3d 954	04/06/05
  Corrected Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	07/21/04
  Brief as Intervenor	05/24/02

• Wilkes v. Wyoming Dep't of Employment (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title VII actions charging illegal discrimination on the basis of sex

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 314 F.3d 501	12/23/02
  Brief as Intervenor	05/20/02

• Wilson v. Pennsylvania State Police Dep't (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Congress validly conditioned receipt of federal funds on waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 suits
  • Title I of the ADA may be enforced against state officials for prospective relief

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 2002 WL 31492373	11/07/02
  Reply Brief	06/07/02
  Brief as Intervenor	04/23/02

• Vadie v. Miss. State Univ. (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • University is precluded from asserting an Eleventh Amendment immunity defense by law of the case
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title VII actions charging illegal retaliation for making Title VII complaint

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 218 F.3d 365	06/25/02
  Brief as Intervenor	04/01/02

• Project Life v. Glendening (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 46 F. App'x 147	09/04/02
  Brief as Intervenor	03/25/02

• Kiman v. New Hampshire Dep't of Corrections (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 332 F.3d 29	06/13/03
  Supplemental En Banc Brief for the United States as Intervenor	05/05/03
  Brief as Intervenor	03/18/02

• Wessel v. Glendening (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Title II of the ADA may be enforced by injunction against state officials

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 306 F.3d 203	09/26/02
  Brief as Intervenor	02/26/02

• Badillo-Santiago v. Andreau-Garcia (1st Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 378 F.3d 1	07/29/04
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	06/28/04
  Supplemental Letter Brief as Intervenor	01/13/04
  Brief as Intervenor	02/12/02

• Johnson v. Hamrick (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is valid legislation to enforce the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments
  • Defendants' challenge to the constitutionality of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is barred by law of the case

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 296 F.3d 1065	07/05/02
  Brief as Intervenor	01/28/02

• Patrick W. v. Anderson (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions
  • Section 504 may be enforced by injunction against state officials

   

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	03/06/03
  Brief as Intervenor	01/11/02

• Pace v. Bogalusa City Sch. Bd. (5th Cir.) -- Amicus

  • Failure to establish a violation of the IDEA does not necessarily preclude a plaintiff's related claims under the ADA and Section 504
  • Whether a state agency’s application for and acceptance of federal financial assistance constituted an effective waiver of its sovereign immunity to suits under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
  • Whether a state agency’s application for and acceptance of funds under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) constituted an effective waiver of its sovereign immunity to suits under that statute.
  • Conditioning federal funds on a knowing and voluntary waiver of a State's Eleventh Amendment immunity is a valid exercise of Congress's Spending Clause authority
  • As applied to discrimination in education, Title II is congruent and proportional to the constitutional rights at issue and the history of discrimination

   

  Document	Date
  En Banc Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 403 F.3d 272	03/08/05
  Second Supplemental En Banc Brief as Intervenor	07/01/04
  Supplemental En Banc Brief as Intervenor	08/12/03
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Granted, reported at 339 F.3d 348	07/17/03
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc for the United States as Intervenor	05/07/03
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 325 F.3d 609	03/24/03
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	10/25/02
  Brief as Amicus	01/09/02

• Nanda v. Univ. of Illinois (7th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title VII actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 303 F.3d 817	09/17/02
  Brief as Intervenor	12/13/01

• Chisolm v. McManimon (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 275 F.3d 315	12/28/01
  Brief as Intervenor	11/02/01

• Thomas v. Nakatani (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II actions
  • Title II of the ADA may be enforce by injunction against state officials

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 309 F.3d 1203	11/06/02
  Brief as Intervenor	10/28/01

• Koslow v. Pennsylvania (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions
  • Title I of the ADA may be enforced by injunction against state officials

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 302 F.3d 161	08/21/02
  Reply brief	12/13/01
  Brief as Intervenor	10/23/01

• Garrett v. University of Alabama (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 344 F.3d 1288	09/11/03
  Reply Brief as Intervenor	05/02/03
  Brief as Intervenor	03/13/03
  Court of Appeals Decision on Rehearing, reported at 276 F.3d 1227	12/20/01
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	09/27/01

• Simmons v. Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 34 F. App'x 152	03/21/02
  Brief as Intervenor	08/08/01
  Brief as Intervenor	08/08/01

• Lovell v. Chandler (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 303 F.3d 1039	09/05/02
  Brief as Intervenor	07/09/01

• Vinson v. Thomas (9th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 288 F.3d 1145	05/03/02
  Brief as Intervenor	06/12/01

• Popovich v. Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals En Banc Decision, reported at 276 F.3d 808	01/10/02
  En Banc Brief as Intervenor	05/30/01

• Root v. Georgia State Bd. of Veterinary Medicine (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II actions

   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing Denied	05/17/01
  Petition for Rehearing	04/26/01

• McAleese v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Corrections (3d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions
  • Title II and Section 504 may be enforced against statute officials through injunctive relief even if Congress did not validly remove States' sovereign immunity

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 275 F.3d 36	08/27/01
  Brief as Intervenor	05/02/01

• Garcia v. S.U.N.Y. Health Sciences Center (2d Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title II of the ADA is valid legislation under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid legislation under the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to ADA Title II and Section 504 actions

   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	02/06/02
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	11/16/01
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 280 F.3d 98	09/25/01
  Brief as Intervenor	04/13/01

• Robinson v. Kansas (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title VI and Section 504 actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 295 F.3d 1183	07/09/02
  Brief as Intervenor	02/05/01

• Lunnie v. University of Arkansas (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title VII's prohibitions on race discrimination and retaliation are valid exercises of Congress' power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title VII actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 255 F.3d 615	06/20/01
  Brief as Intervenor	12/29/00

• Okruhlik v. University of Arkansas (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title VII's prohibitions on sex discrimination and retaliation are valid exercises of Congress' power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title VII actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 255 F.3d 615	06/20/01
  Brief as Intervenor	12/06/00

• Asbury v. Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to IDEA and Section 504 actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 9 F. App'x 558	04/18/01
  Brief as Intervenor	11/07/00

• Siler-Khodr v. University of Texas Health Science Center (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Equal Pay Act is valid exercise of Congress' power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Equal Pay Act actions

   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	05/16/02
  Response to Petition for Rehearing En Banc	10/19/01
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 261 F.3d 542	08/24/01
  Brief as Intervenor	09/15/00

• Roary v. Freeman (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 3 F. App'x 114	02/14/01
  Reply Brief	10/16/00
  Brief as Intervenor	08/16/00

• Thompson v. Colorado (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • May enforce Title II against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)
  • Title II of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title II actions

   

  Document	Date
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied	10/09/01
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	09/20/01
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 258 F.3d 1241	08/07/01
  Supplemental Brief as Intervenor	04/13/01
  Brief as Intervenor	06/23/00

• Pawlowski v. Regents of the University of Colorado (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Equal Pay Act is valid exercise of Congress' power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Equal Pay Act actions

   

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	08/22/00
  Brief as Intervenor	06/15/00

• Cisneros v. Wilson (10th Cir.) -- Intervenor

  • Title I of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • May enforce Title I against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)

   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 226 F.3d 1113	09/11/00
  Brief as Intervenor	05/25/00

• Groome Resources, Ltd. v. Parish of Jefferson (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Fair Housing Act is a valid exercise of the Commerce Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Tenth Amendment no bar to application of Fair Housing Act to county
  • Act is not unconstitutionally vague

  
    

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 234 F. 3d 192	11/22/00
  Brief as Intervenor	02/22/00

• Hundertmark v. Watts (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Equal Pay Act is valid exercise of Congress' power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Equal Pay Act actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 205 F.3d 1272	03/07/00
  Brief as Intervenor	02/22/00

• Amos v. Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (4th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Title II of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title II and Section 504 actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals En Banc Decision, reported at 205 F.3d 687	03/06/00
  En Banc Reply Brief	02/22/00
  En Banc Brief as Intervenor	01/21/00

• Walker v. Snyder (7th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Suits against state officials in their individual capacities not barred by t he Eleventh Amendment
  • May enforce Title II against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)
  • Title II of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title II actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 531 U.S. 1190	02/26/01
  Petition for Writ of Certiorari	10/10/00
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 213 F.3d 344	05/16/00
  Brief as Intervenor	12/27/99

• Ruiz v. Johnson (5th Cir.) -- Appellee/cross-appellant 

  • Termination provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act do not violate separation of powers or due process

  
    

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 243 F.3d 941	03/20/01
  Reply Brief	05/10/00
  Brief as Appellee/Cross-Appellant	11/30/99

• Pomeroy v. Western Michigan University (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Title I of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title I and Section 504 actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, available at 5 F. App'x 437	02/28/01
  Brief as Intervenor	10/12/99

• United States v. Gregg (3d Cir.) -- Appellant/cross-appellee 

  • Defendants are individually, not jointly and severally, liable under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act for statutory damages of $5,000 per violation
  • FACE is a valid exercise of the Commerce Clause
  • FACE does not violate the First Amendment
  • FACE is not vague or overbroad

  
    

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 532 U.S. 971	04/15/01
  Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari	03/12/01
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 226 F.3d 253	09/07/00
  Reply Brief	12/13/99
  Brief as Appellant/Cross-Appellee	10/06/99

• Johnson v. Tennessee Technical Center at Memphis (6th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Title II of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title II and Section 504 actions
  • Denying accessibility to courthouses and colleges implicates constitutional rights

  
    

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	07/12/99
  Brief as Intervenor	04/07/99

• Sandoval v. Hagan (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor/Amicus 

  • Title VI is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title VI actions
  • May enforce Title VI against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)
  • Private right of action to enforce Title VI discriminatory effects standard
  • English-only laws' discriminatory effect on the basis of national origin

  
    

  Document	Date
  Supreme Court Decision, reported at 532 U.S. 275	04/24/01
  Supreme Court Brief	12/13/00
  Certiorari Granted, reported at 530 U.S. 1305	09/26/00
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 197 F.3d 484	11/30/99
  Brief as Intervenor/Amicus	01/11/99

• Beasley v. Alabama State University (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Title IX, Education Amendments of 1972, is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title IX actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Dismissed	09/27/99
  Brief as Intervenor	10/30/98

• Larry v. Board of Trustees (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Equal Pay Act is valid exercise of Congress' power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Equal Pay Act actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 211 F.3d 598 (Table)	03/22/00
  Supplemental Brief	08/02/99
  Reply Brief	12/21/98
  Brief as Intervenor	10/23/98

• Onishea v. Hopper (11th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions
  • May enforce Section 504 against state officials in their official capacities (Ex parte Young)
  • Section 504 was intended to protect HIV-positive persons

  
    

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 528 U.S. 1114	01/18/00
  Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari	12/21/99
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 171 F.3d 1289	04/07/99
  Brief as Intervenor	10/07/98

• Jim C. v. Arkansas Department of Education (8th Cir.) -- intervenor 

  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Section 504 actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 533 U.S. 949	06/29/01
  Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari	05/31/01
  Court of Appeals En Banc Decision, reported at 197 F.3d 958	12/22/00
  Petition for Rehearing En Banc	10/15/99
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 189 F.3d 745	08/31/99
  Brief as Intervenor	06/17/98

• Bradley v. Arkansas Department of Education (8th Cir.) -- intervenor 

  • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to IDEA actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 189 F.3d 745	08/31/99
  Brief as Intervenor	04/16/98

• Pederson v. Louisiana State University (5th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Title IX, Education Amendments of 1972, is valid exercise of the Spending Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title IX actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision (amended), reported at 213 F.3d 858	06/01/00
  Brief Opposing Petition for Rehearing En Banc	03/02/00
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 201 F.3d 388	01/27/00
  Brief as Intervenor	04/07/98

• DeBose v. Nebraska (8th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Title I of ADA is valid exercise of the power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Title I actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 531 U.S. 1190	02/26/01
  Supplemental Petition for Writ of Certiorari	01/14/00
  Petition for Writ of Certiorari	12/23/99
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 207 F.3d 1020	08/09/99
  Supplemental Brief	08/16/99
  Brief as Intervenor	02/02/98

• Varner v. Illinois State University (7th Cir.) -- Intervenor 

  • Equal Pay Act is valid exercise of Congress' power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • Title VII's prohibition on policies with unjustified disparate impact on the basis of sex is valid exercise of Congress' power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment
  • No Eleventh Amendment immunity to Equal Pay Act or Title VII actions

  
    

  Document	Date
  Certiorari Denied, reported at 533 U.S. 902	06/01/01
  Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari	05/14/01
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 226 F.3d 927	09/06/00
  Supplemental Brief	04/03/00
  Supreme Court Order, reported at 528 U.S. 1110	01/18/00
  Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari	04/16/99
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 150 F.3d 706	07/21/98
  Brief as Intervenor	12/02/97

Browse Briefs by Category

Access to Justice
Affirmative Action
Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
Constitutionality of Federal Statutes
Criminal
Education
Employment Discrimination (Race, National Origin, Sex, and Religion)
Equal Credit Opportunity Act
Equal Protection Clause
Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act
Housing
Immigration
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Institutionalized Persons
Police Misconduct (Civil Cases)
Religion Cases
Servicemember Cases
Third Party Intervention in Civil Rights Cases
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Voting
Other