Tennessee V. Lane

The plaintiffs were disabled Tennesseans who could not access the upper floors in state courthouses. They sued in federal court, arguing that since Tennessee was denying them public services because of their disabilities, it was violating Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). Under Title II, no one can be denied access to public services due to his or her Disability ; it allows those whose rights have been violated to Sue states for Money Damages .

Tennessee argued that the on the basis of disability to justify the abrogation of sovereign immunity.

In ''Lane'', the Supreme Court split 5-4. In an opinion written by Justice John Paul Stevens , the majority ruled that Congress ''did'' have enough evidence that The Disabled were being denied those fundamental rights that are protected by the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, among those rights being the right to access a court. Further, the remedy Congress enacted was congruent and proportional, because the "reasonable accommodations" mandated by the ADA were not unduly burdensome and disproportionate to the harm. ''Garrett'', the Court said, applied only to Equal Protection claims, not to Due Process claims. Therefore the law was constitutional. Justices William Rehnquist , Clarence Thomas , and Antonin Scalia filed dissents.

Information About

Tennessee V. Lane