Case law · Highest court · Federal

Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman

Decided
January 23, 1984
Docket
81-2101
Status
Published
Jurisdiction
Federal

Cited 8,956 timesSuperseded by statute (verified)Possible negative treatment: superseded by statute, overruled in part on other grounds (5 of 29 verified; none is a verified overruling) · Stahl v. Klotz

What later courts said

  • holding that llth Amendment bars claims against state “regardless of whether monetary damages, equitable relief, or retrospective declaratory relief is sought” — Keitt v. New York City (2011)
  • holding that defendants including Pennsylvania DPW, and Pennhurst State School and Hospital — “a state institution” — were entitled to immunity under the Eleventh Amendment — Betts v. New Castle Youth Development Center (2010)
  • holding that the Eleventh Amendment bars federal courts from enjoining state officials from violating state law — (untitled) (1996)

Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.

How the opinion begins

Justice Powell delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case presents the question whether a federal court may award injunctive relief against state officials on the basis of state law.

[*92] I — t This litigation, here for the second time, concerns the conditions of care at petitioner Pennhurst State School and Hospital, a Pennsylvania institution for the care of the mentally retarded. See Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman, 451 U. S. 1 (1981). Although the litigation’s history is set forth in detail in our prior opinion, see id., at 5-10, it is necessary for purposes of this decision to review that history.

Statutes cited

Cite this

Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984)

Read the full opinion

Free account needed

Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.