|
''Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank'', 527 U.S. 627 (1999), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States relating to the doctrine of sovereign immunity. ''Florida Prepaid'' was a companion case to the similarly named (but not to be confused) ''College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board'', 527 U.S. 666 (1999). Where ''College Savings Bank'' was an action brought under the Lanham Act, ''Florida Prepaid'' was a concurrent action brought under the Patent and Plant Variety Protection Remedy Clarification Act. Although it was unnecessary to reach the question of whether Congress had validly abrogated Florida's sovereign immunity in ''College Savings Bank'', the question was unavoidable in ''Florida Prepaid''. In a 5-4 decision authored by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the court held that the Act's abrogation of States' sovereign immunity was invalid. Congress could only abrogate sovereign immunity pursuant to its powers under § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment and not Article I (see ''Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer''; ''Seminole Tribe v. Florida''). Applying the § 5 test provided in ''City of Boerne v. Flores'', the validity of the Act could not be sustained. ==See also== * List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 527 * List of United States Supreme Court cases * Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|