Supreme Court of the United States
Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman
April 20, 1981451 U.S. 1
Summary
The Court held that 42 U.S.C. §6010 does not create enforceable substantive rights for developmentally disabled persons and therefore imposes no mandatory obligations on states; it reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this construction.
Holding
- Whether 42 U.S.C. §6010 creates substantive rights enforceable in federal court.. §6010 does not create substantive rights; it is a non‑mandatory statement of congressional policy and imposes no binding obligations on states.
Docket 79-1404
Cited authorities
- Rule 35.5
- 42 U.S.C. §§ 6061-6063
- 20 U.S.C. §§ 1401-1420
- 89 Stat. 486
- 42 U.S.C. § 6000
- 87 Stat. 355
- 29 U.S.C. § 701
- 42 U.S.C. §§ 6001
Cited by
- Cimmaron Olszewski, a Minor v. Scripps Health, Defendant and Respondent
- Planned Parenthood of Indiana, Inc. v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Health
- Benjamin Rauf, Defendant-Appellant v. State of Delaware, Plaintiff-Appellee
- City of El Centro, Plaintiffs and Appellants v. David Lanier, as Secretary
- Bryan C v. Lambrew
- Laurene C. Cuvillier, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Donald R. Taylor; Hugh C. Redhead; Johnnie Sullivan; Betty Polk…
- Patricia Gonzalez v. David Pingree
- National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius