Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs

E403299

United States Supreme Court case court case landmark decision

Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power to subject states to damages suits under the Family and Medical Leave Act as a valid exercise of its enforcement authority under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

All labels observed (1)

Label	Occurrences
Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs canonical	3

Statements (49)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ court case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ
citation	123 S. Ct. 1972 ⓘ 155 L. Ed. 2d 953 ⓘ 538 U.S. 721 ⓘ
concurrenceBy	David H. Souter ⓘ John Paul Stevens ⓘ
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	2003-05-27 ⓘ
dissentBy	Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ Antonin Scalia ⓘ Clarence Thomas ⓘ
docketNumber	01-1368 ⓘ
holding	Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity in enacting the family-care provision of the Family and Medical Leave Act under its Section 5 enforcement power of the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ States may be sued for money damages by employees for violations of the FMLA’s family-care leave provisions ⓘ
issue	Whether Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity when it allowed state employees to recover money damages in federal court for the state’s failure to comply with the FMLA’s family-care leave provision ⓘ
joinedMajority	Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ Antonin Scalia ⓘ David H. Souter ⓘ John Paul Stevens ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
jurisdiction	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
legalProvisionInterpreted	Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 ⓘ Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
legalSubject	Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 ⓘ surface form: Family and Medical Leave Act Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ civil rights ⓘ constitutional law ⓘ employment law ⓘ federal courts ⓘ gender discrimination ⓘ state sovereign immunity ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
majorityVote	6-3 ⓘ
petitioner	Nevada Department of Human Resources ⓘ
precedentFor	Congress’s power to abrogate state sovereign immunity under the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ application of Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to gender discrimination in leave policies ⓘ
relatedCase	Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett ⓘ City of Boerne v. Flores ⓘ Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents ⓘ Tennessee v. Lane ⓘ
respondent	William Hibbs NERFINISHED ⓘ
result	judgment of the Ninth Circuit affirmed ⓘ
term	October Term 2002 ⓘ
topic	abrogation of state sovereign immunity ⓘ congruence and proportionality test ⓘ sex-based classifications ⓘ
yearDecided	2003 ⓘ

Referenced by (3)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment → interpretedByCase → Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs ⓘ

United States sovereign immunity law → keyCase → Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs ⓘ

Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett → subsequentCitationBy → Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs ⓘ