Nevada Dep’t of Human Resources v. Hibbs
Citation and Court
538 U.S. 721 (2003) — Supreme Court of the United States
Facts
William Hibbs, a Nevada state employee, sought leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to care for his ailing wife. Nevada denied him adequate leave, and he brought suit under the FMLA’s self-care provision. Nevada asserted Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in federal court.
Issue
Whether Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity under the FMLA’s family-care provision pursuant to its § 5 Fourteenth Amendment enforcement power.
Holding
Yes. Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity when it enacted the FMLA’s family-care provisions because the legislation was congruent and proportional to a documented pattern of state discrimination on the basis of sex in the administration of leave policies.
Rule / Doctrine
Under City of Boerne v. Flores, Congress may abrogate state Eleventh Amendment immunity under § 5 if the legislation is congruent and proportional to a pattern of constitutional violations by the states. Because sex classifications receive heightened scrutiny under equal protection, Congress needs less legislative evidence of a pattern of violations to justify broader prophylactic legislation.
Significance
Hibbs is a landmark case on the scope of Congress’s § 5 power to abrogate state sovereign immunity. It distinguished the FMLA from statutes struck down in Kimel and Garrett by relying on heightened scrutiny for sex discrimination, showing that the level of judicial scrutiny applicable to the underlying constitutional right affects how much prophylactic legislation Congress may enact.