Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents
E494918
Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case that held Congress lacked authority under the Fourteenth Amendment to subject nonconsenting states to private suits for money damages under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents canonical | 4 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T5099863 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents Context triple: [Alden v. Maine, relatedCase, Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents]
-
A.
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett is a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited Congress’s power to subject states to damages suits under the Americans with Disabilities Act by narrowing the scope of its enforcement authority under the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
B.
Agostini v. Felton
Agostini v. Felton is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court case that reshaped Establishment Clause doctrine by allowing public school teachers to provide remedial instruction in religious schools under certain safeguards.
-
C.
Gratz v. Bollinger
Gratz v. Bollinger is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down the University of Michigan’s undergraduate affirmative action admissions policy as violating the Equal Protection Clause by awarding automatic points based on race.
-
D.
Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College
Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College is a landmark 2023 U.S. Supreme Court case that sharply limited the use of race-conscious admissions policies in higher education, effectively ending affirmative action programs at colleges and universities nationwide.
-
E.
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down city ordinances targeting Santería animal sacrifice and clarified that laws burdening religious practice must be neutral and generally applicable under the Free Exercise Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents Target entity description: Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case that held Congress lacked authority under the Fourteenth Amendment to subject nonconsenting states to private suits for money damages under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
-
A.
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett is a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited Congress’s power to subject states to damages suits under the Americans with Disabilities Act by narrowing the scope of its enforcement authority under the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
B.
Agostini v. Felton
Agostini v. Felton is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court case that reshaped Establishment Clause doctrine by allowing public school teachers to provide remedial instruction in religious schools under certain safeguards.
-
C.
Gratz v. Bollinger
Gratz v. Bollinger is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down the University of Michigan’s undergraduate affirmative action admissions policy as violating the Equal Protection Clause by awarding automatic points based on race.
-
D.
Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College
Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College is a landmark 2023 U.S. Supreme Court case that sharply limited the use of race-conscious admissions policies in higher education, effectively ending affirmative action programs at colleges and universities nationwide.
-
E.
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down city ordinances targeting Santería animal sacrifice and clarified that laws burdening religious practice must be neutral and generally applicable under the Free Exercise Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
federal court case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
employment discrimination law ⓘ federal courts ⓘ |
| citation |
120 S. Ct. 631
ⓘ
145 L. Ed. 2d 522 ⓘ 528 U.S. 62 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2000-01-11 ⓘ |
| defendant |
Board of Regents of the State of Florida
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Florida Board of Regents NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| dissentingJustices |
David H. Souter
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED ⓘ Ruth Bader Ginsburg NERFINISHED ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 98-791 ⓘ |
| holding |
Congress lacked authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to subject nonconsenting states to private suits for money damages under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act
ⓘ
Private individuals may not recover money damages from nonconsenting states for violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ⓘ The Age Discrimination in Employment Act is not a valid exercise of Congress’s Section 5 enforcement power as applied to the states NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| impact | Limited Congress’s ability to subject states to private damages suits under federal anti-discrimination statutes ⓘ |
| issue | Whether Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| language | English ⓘ |
| legalSubject |
Age Discrimination in Employment Act
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Eleventh Amendment NERFINISHED ⓘ Fourteenth Amendment Section 5 enforcement power ⓘ state sovereign immunity ⓘ |
| majorityJustices |
Anthony M. Kennedy
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Antonin Scalia NERFINISHED ⓘ Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor NERFINISHED ⓘ William H. Rehnquist NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Sandra Day O’Connor NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| plaintiff | J. Daniel Kimel Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
City of Boerne v. Flores NERFINISHED ⓘ Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine | congruence and proportionality test ⓘ |
| relatedStatute | Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| result | State employers gained immunity from private suits for money damages under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted | 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. ⓘ |
| term | October Term 1999 ⓘ |
| topic |
federalism in the United States
ⓘ
state liability for employment discrimination ⓘ |
| vote | 5-4 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents Description of subject: Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case that held Congress lacked authority under the Fourteenth Amendment to subject nonconsenting states to private suits for money damages under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
Referenced by (4)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.