S.D.Miss: No immunity for ADA prison suit

A Mississippi federal magistrate held, in a suit by a state prisoner, that Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) abrogated state sovereign immunity. Morgan v. State of Mississippi, 2008 WL 410645 (S.D.Miss. Feb. 12, 2008) (No. 2:07cv15-MTP).

 The judge cited to Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 518 (2004) (Title II abrogation valid for claims implicating access to courts), without discussing the applicability of Lane’s holding.

 

            The allegations against the State and various officials included refusal to provide adequate medical care, violation of free exercise of religion, denial of access to the courts, and inadequate administrative procedures. The magistrate’s order did not state specifically which conduct was subsumed within the plaintiff’s ADA claims.

 

            The magistrate judge concluded that the corrections officials were entitled to sovereign immunity from the constitutional claims under § 1983, except inasmuch as they sought injunctive relief under Ex Parte Young. With regard to the ADA claims, however, the magistrate judge said only:

Eleventh Amendment immunity does not bar plaintiff's claims against the defendants under the ADA because Congress clearly intended to abrogate the States' Eleventh Amendment immunity in passing Title II of the ADA. See 42 U.S.C. § 12202 (“A State shall not be immune under the eleventh amendment ... from an action in Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction for a violation of this chapter.”); Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 518 (2004).

The magistrate judge noted that the defendants’ motion to dismiss did not address the ADA claims.

 

              Other recent cases have stated broadly that Title II of the ADA does not validly abrogate sovereign immunity in the prison context. Chase v. Baskerville, 508 F.Supp.2d 492 (E.D.Va. 2007) (summary here); Hale v. Mississippi, 2007 WL 3357562 (S.D.Miss. 2007) (summary here). Notably, the allegations in those cases related to medical/psychiatric care and access to education programs, but not access to the courts.