Does Congress Have the Power to Abrogate State Sovereign Immunity (Under the 14th Amendment)

United States v. Georgia

Tony Goodman, a quadrapeligic prisoner, brought an action against Georgia for violations of the 8th Amendment and Titie II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA prohibits "[exclusion] from participation in, or [denial of], the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity." For the purpose of this case Goodman was qualified, though the statute provided that only reasonable accomodations (description) were necessary, and prisons do qualify as a "department, agency, ... or other insturmentality of the state" which the statute applies to. Congress passed the statute, citing the power granted by the final clause of the Amendment ("The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article"), and included a provision arbogating state soverign immunity (Wikipedia definition)("[a] State shall not be immune under the eleventh amendment to the Constitution of the United States from an action in [a] Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction for a violation of this chapter.") The 11th circuit held that Goodman's claims were barred by state soverign immunity. The question in this case is the extent of the grant of power in section 5 of the 14th Amendment empowers Congress to arbogate state soverign immunity.

Goodman's claims included degrading, neglegent, and discriminatory treatment such as refusing necessary assistance, and placing him in a cell where he was effectively restrained (by his inability to rotate his wheelchair) for 23 hours a day. Because some of these claims included violations of section 1 of the 14th Amendment, and because "[the] enforcement power includes the power to arbogate state sovereign immunity" the Court reversed the decision of the 11th circuit, and remanded the case so the lower courts could determine which of Goodman's claims constituted a violation of both the ADA and the 14th Amdndment. Essentially, the Court decided that the enforcement provision of the 14th Amdendment granted Congress the power to arbogate state soverign immunity, but since this was only accomplished for violations of the ADA, the lower courts have to determine where the allegations overlap the two.

Justice Stevens concurs in what seems to be an attempt to emphasize that Goodman is free to allege violations of constitutional rights other than the 8th Amendment. It is interesting to consider that because Congress has "the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of" the 14th Amendment, and because the Due Process clause of the amendment incorporates (almost all of) the other rights in the Bill of Rights, have we enumerated 9 new powers of Congress with the 14th Amdendment? Or is the 5th section limited in another way? Have we completely revesred the idea that the Bill of Rights should not be enumerations of Congressional power?