The Imperial Sovereign: Sovereign Immunity & the ADA

Professors Brown and Parmet examine the impact of the Supreme Court's resurrection of state sovereign immunity on the rights of individuals protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act in light of the recent decision, Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett. Placing Garrett within the context of the Rehnquist Court's evolving reallocation of state and federal authority, they argue that the Court has relied upon a mythic and dangerous notion of sovereignty that is foreign to the Framers' understanding. Brown and Parmet go on to show that, by determining that federalism compels constraining congressional power to abrogate sovereign immunity, the Court limits the ability of individuals with disabilities to obtain federal recourse. They also contend that the Court's restriction of fora for individuals with disabilities raises significant separation of powers problems.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.36646/mjlr.35.1.2.imperial
Primary Topic
Corporate Law and Human Rights
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Imperial Sovereign: Sovereign Immunity & the ADA

Wendy E. Parmet, Judith Olans Brown
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Corporate Law and Human Rights
article

The Imperial Sovereign: Sovereign Immunity & the ADA

Wendy E. Parmet, Judith Olans Brown
article en

Abstract

Professors Brown and Parmet examine the impact of the Supreme Court's resurrection of state sovereign immunity on the rights of individuals protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act in light of the recent decision, Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett. Placing Garrett within the context of the Rehnquist Court's evolving reallocation of state and federal authority, they argue that the Court has relied upon a mythic and dangerous notion of sovereignty that is foreign to the Framers' understanding. Brown and Parmet go on to show that, by determining that federalism compels constraining congressional power to abrogate sovereign immunity, the Court limits the ability of individuals with disabilities to obtain federal recourse. They also contend that the Court's restriction of fora for individuals with disabilities raises significant separation of powers problems.

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform(35.1.2)
Northeastern University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 88%
Corporate Law and Human Rights
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.