Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman

This article has multiple issues. Please help or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) This article relies too much on references to primary sources. Please improve this by adding secondary or tertiary sources. (January 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) This article is missing information about all section headings bar the lead sentence & references. Please expand the article to include this information. Further details may exist on the talk page. (January 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued February 22, 1983 Reargued October 3, 1983 Decided January 23, 1984
Full case name	Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman
Docket no.	81-2101
Citations	465 U.S. 89 (more) 104 S. Ct. 900; 79 L. Ed. 2d 67
Argument	Oral argument
Reargument	Reargument
Court membership
Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun Lewis F. Powell Jr. · William Rehnquist John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Case opinions
Majority	Powell, joined by Burger, White, Rehnquist, O'Connor
Dissent	Stevens, joined by Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun
Dissent	Brennan
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XI;

Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court decision holding that the Eleventh Amendment prohibits a federal court from ordering state officials to obey state law.^[1]

Background[]

Proceedings[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2016)

Decision[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2018)

Majority[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2018)

Dissent[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2018)

Subsequent developments[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2018)

The Pennhurst Longitudinal Study[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2018)

Analysis and significance[]

Panel discussion, "The Disability Rights Movement: From Pennhurst Until Today", U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, Washington, D.C., 27 June 2016. Left to right: James W. Conroy, principal investigator on the Pennhurst Longitudinal Study and Co-President of the Pennhurst Memorial and Preservation Alliance; Nancy Thaler, Deputy Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Human Services; Peter Berns, Chief Executive Officer, the Arc of the United States; Jean Searle, member of the Pennhurst class and Co-President of the Pennhurst Memorial and Preservation Alliance; Thomas Gilhool, Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia and lead plaintiff's attorney in Penshurst v. Halderman; Janet Albert-Herman, a board member of the Arc of Pennsylvania and Treasurer of the Pennhurst Memorial and Preservation Alliance.

The Pennhurst doctrine[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2018)

References[]

Bibliography[]

Court documents

Law journal analyses

• Boyd, Penelope A. (1981). "The Aftermath of the DD Act: Is there Life after Pennhurst?". University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Journal. University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Bowen School of Law. 4 (3): 448–466.
• Brant, Jonathan (1983). "Pennhurst, Romeo, and Rogers: The Burger Court and Mental Health Law Reform Litigation". The Journal of Legal Medicine. 4 (3): 323–348. doi:10.1080/01947648309513387.
• Brant, Jonathan (1983). "The Hostility of the Burger Court to Mental Health Law Reform Litigation". Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. 11 (1): 77–90.
• Chemerinsky, Erwin (Summer 1985). "State Sovereignty and Federal Court Power: The Eleventh Amendment after Pennhurst v. Halderman" (PDF). Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly. University of California, Hastings College of the Law. 12 (4): 643–668. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-10-16. Retrieved 2016-06-22.
• Ferleger, David; Boyd, Penelope A. (April 1979). "Anti-Institutionalization: The Promise of the Pennhurst Case". Stanford Law Review. Stanford Law School. 31 (4): 717–752. doi:10.2307/1228423. JSTOR 1228423.
• Ferleger, David; Scott, Patrice Maguire (1983). "Rights and Dignity: Congress, the Supreme Court, and People with Disabilities after Pennhurst". Western New England Law Review. Western New England University School of Law. 5 (3): 327–361.
• Smith, Peter J. (May 2001). "Penshurst, Chevron, and the Spending Power". Yale Law Journal. The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc. 110 (7): 1, 187–1, 245.

Journalism

• "Pennsylvania Settles Key Suit on Facilities for the Retarded". New York Times. 15 July 1984. Retrieved 1 November 2016.
• Levey, Noam N. (25 February 2015). "The Conservative Ruling that Might Save Obamacare". Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Cal. Retrieved 20 June 2016.
• McIntyre, Adrianna (3 March 2015). "Understanding 'Pennhurst': The Legal Doctrine that Could Save Obamacare". VOX. Retrieved 20 June 2016.

Other sources

• Conroy, James W.; Bradley, Valerie (1 March 1985). The Pennhurst Longitudinal Study: A Report of Five Years Research and Analysis (Report). Philadelphia, Penn.: Temple University Developmental Disabilities Center. Retrieved 1 November 2016.

Precedents[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2016)

Subsequent case law[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2016)

Other related cases[]

This section is empty. You can help by . (November 2016)

External links[]

• Text of Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984) is available from: CourtListener  Justia  Library of Congress  Oyez (oral argument audio) 
• Suffer The Little Children, a 1968 exposé on Pennhurst State School by NBC10 reporter Bill Baldini.

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by .

• v
• t