Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=U.S. Supreme Court |citation=120 S.Ct. 631 (2000) |date=2000 |subject=Constitutional Law |appealed_from= |case_treatment=No |overturned= |partially...") |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|subject=Constitutional Law | |subject=Constitutional Law | ||
|appealed_from= | |appealed_from= | ||
|overturned= | |overturned= | ||
|partially_overturned= | |partially_overturned= | ||
Latest revision as of 03:39, July 14, 2023
| Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents | |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
|---|---|
| Citation | 120 S.Ct. 631 (2000) |
| Date decided | 2000 |
Facts
Congress enacted the Age Discrimination in Employment Act to make it unlawful for a State to fail or refuse to hire an individual because of his age, and allowed money damages for the discrimination.
Issues
Whether the ADEA is constitutional by containing a clear statement of Congress’ intent to abrogate the 11th Amendment immunity, and if so, whether it is a proper exercise of Congress’s constitutional authority.
Holding
No
Rule
Congress has the power to pass laws that enforce, not what constitutes a violation. Using the congruence and proportionality test, this is not appropriate legislation.
