The constitutional status of the ADA: An examination of Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle in light of recent Supreme Court decisions concerning the 11th Amendment
Sutor and Hamilton analyze the "Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle" decision in the light of the US Supreme Court's recent decisions concerning the 11th Amendment and address whether the "Alsbrook" court correctly determined that the Americans with Disabilities Act is unconstituti...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Review of litigation 2000-07, Vol.19 (3), p.485 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 485 |
| container_title | The Review of litigation |
| container_volume | 19 |
| creator | Sutor, Sarah E Grant Hamilton, Susan Elizabeth |
| description | Sutor and Hamilton analyze the "Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle" decision in the light of the US Supreme Court's recent decisions concerning the 11th Amendment and address whether the "Alsbrook" court correctly determined that the Americans with Disabilities Act is unconstitutional as applied to state actors. They conclude that there is a sound basis for the 8th Circuit's holding that the ADA is unconstitutional as applied to state actors. |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_206862663</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>55312910</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_2068626633</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNTstOAzEQywEkyuMfRtyLst2yXfUWbUFcONF7FbbTbtrspM1MEHwM_0qC-AAOliXbsn2hJnpRz6dzXT1eqWvmg9Z60bZ6or7XA0IfiMVJEhfIemCxkhjCDiSbZmWWYAjw046ObMkUy3h-jyEc4eMBOidfRXu1aUTvERyBd_tBihixRxJ4S6eII0IXUhTYYu84N3HZ7jGSo_3vWlXJAGZE2mbIrbrcWc9498c36v75ad29TE8xnBOybA65Ln_mzUw3bTNrmrr-V-gHcC5ZJA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>206862663</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The constitutional status of the ADA: An examination of Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle in light of recent Supreme Court decisions concerning the 11th Amendment</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Sutor, Sarah E ; Grant Hamilton, Susan Elizabeth</creator><creatorcontrib>Sutor, Sarah E ; Grant Hamilton, Susan Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><description>Sutor and Hamilton analyze the "Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle" decision in the light of the US Supreme Court's recent decisions concerning the 11th Amendment and address whether the "Alsbrook" court correctly determined that the Americans with Disabilities Act is unconstitutional as applied to state actors. They conclude that there is a sound basis for the 8th Circuit's holding that the ADA is unconstitutional as applied to state actors.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0734-4015</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Austin: University of Texas, Austin, School of Law Publications, Inc</publisher><subject>Americans with Disabilities Act 1990-US ; Constitutional amendments ; Constitutional law ; Disability discrimination ; District courts ; Employers ; Employment ; Federal court decisions ; Immunity from prosecution ; Jurisdiction ; Law enforcement ; Religion ; State court decisions ; State employees ; States ; Supreme Court decisions ; Workers with disabilities</subject><ispartof>The Review of litigation, 2000-07, Vol.19 (3), p.485</ispartof><rights>Copyright University of Texas, Austin, School of Law Publications, Inc. Summer 2000</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sutor, Sarah E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grant Hamilton, Susan Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><title>The constitutional status of the ADA: An examination of Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle in light of recent Supreme Court decisions concerning the 11th Amendment</title><title>The Review of litigation</title><description>Sutor and Hamilton analyze the "Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle" decision in the light of the US Supreme Court's recent decisions concerning the 11th Amendment and address whether the "Alsbrook" court correctly determined that the Americans with Disabilities Act is unconstitutional as applied to state actors. They conclude that there is a sound basis for the 8th Circuit's holding that the ADA is unconstitutional as applied to state actors.</description><subject>Americans with Disabilities Act 1990-US</subject><subject>Constitutional amendments</subject><subject>Constitutional law</subject><subject>Disability discrimination</subject><subject>District courts</subject><subject>Employers</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Federal court decisions</subject><subject>Immunity from prosecution</subject><subject>Jurisdiction</subject><subject>Law enforcement</subject><subject>Religion</subject><subject>State court decisions</subject><subject>State employees</subject><subject>States</subject><subject>Supreme Court decisions</subject><subject>Workers with disabilities</subject><issn>0734-4015</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNTstOAzEQywEkyuMfRtyLst2yXfUWbUFcONF7FbbTbtrspM1MEHwM_0qC-AAOliXbsn2hJnpRz6dzXT1eqWvmg9Z60bZ6or7XA0IfiMVJEhfIemCxkhjCDiSbZmWWYAjw046ObMkUy3h-jyEc4eMBOidfRXu1aUTvERyBd_tBihixRxJ4S6eII0IXUhTYYu84N3HZ7jGSo_3vWlXJAGZE2mbIrbrcWc9498c36v75ad29TE8xnBOybA65Ln_mzUw3bTNrmrr-V-gHcC5ZJA</recordid><startdate>20000701</startdate><enddate>20000701</enddate><creator>Sutor, Sarah E</creator><creator>Grant Hamilton, Susan Elizabeth</creator><general>University of Texas, Austin, School of Law Publications, Inc</general><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20000701</creationdate><title>The constitutional status of the ADA: An examination of Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle in light of recent Supreme Court decisions concerning the 11th Amendment</title><author>Sutor, Sarah E ; Grant Hamilton, Susan Elizabeth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_2068626633</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Americans with Disabilities Act 1990-US</topic><topic>Constitutional amendments</topic><topic>Constitutional law</topic><topic>Disability discrimination</topic><topic>District courts</topic><topic>Employers</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Federal court decisions</topic><topic>Immunity from prosecution</topic><topic>Jurisdiction</topic><topic>Law enforcement</topic><topic>Religion</topic><topic>State court decisions</topic><topic>State employees</topic><topic>States</topic><topic>Supreme Court decisions</topic><topic>Workers with disabilities</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sutor, Sarah E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grant Hamilton, Susan Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>The Review of litigation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sutor, Sarah E</au><au>Grant Hamilton, Susan Elizabeth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The constitutional status of the ADA: An examination of Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle in light of recent Supreme Court decisions concerning the 11th Amendment</atitle><jtitle>The Review of litigation</jtitle><date>2000-07-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>485</spage><pages>485-</pages><issn>0734-4015</issn><abstract>Sutor and Hamilton analyze the "Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle" decision in the light of the US Supreme Court's recent decisions concerning the 11th Amendment and address whether the "Alsbrook" court correctly determined that the Americans with Disabilities Act is unconstitutional as applied to state actors. They conclude that there is a sound basis for the 8th Circuit's holding that the ADA is unconstitutional as applied to state actors.</abstract><cop>Austin</cop><pub>University of Texas, Austin, School of Law Publications, Inc</pub></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0734-4015 |
| ispartof | The Review of litigation, 2000-07, Vol.19 (3), p.485 |
| issn | 0734-4015 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_206862663 |
| source | HeinOnline Law Journal Library |
| subjects | Americans with Disabilities Act 1990-US Constitutional amendments Constitutional law Disability discrimination District courts Employers Employment Federal court decisions Immunity from prosecution Jurisdiction Law enforcement Religion State court decisions State employees States Supreme Court decisions Workers with disabilities |
| title | The constitutional status of the ADA: An examination of Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle in light of recent Supreme Court decisions concerning the 11th Amendment |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T09%3A00%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20constitutional%20status%20of%20the%20ADA:%20An%20examination%20of%20Alsbrook%20v.%20City%20of%20Maumelle%20in%20light%20of%20recent%20Supreme%20Court%20decisions%20concerning%20the%2011th%20Amendment&rft.jtitle=The%20Review%20of%20litigation&rft.au=Sutor,%20Sarah%20E&rft.date=2000-07-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=485&rft.pages=485-&rft.issn=0734-4015&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E55312910%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=206862663&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |