Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | T | Trial

Limiting suits to enforce federal laws.

Article Excerpt
In July 2002, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, speaking at the Fourth Circuit Judicial Conference, identified Gonzaga University v. Doe as one of the "sleeper decisions" of the term--the case received relatively little media attention but is likely to have great importance in the future. (1) For plaintiffs seeking to enforce federal laws against violations by state and local governments via [section] 1983 actions. (2) Gonzaga University may pose a substantial obstacle to litigation.

In this case, the Supreme Court held that a federal law adopted by Congress under its spending power may be enforced through a [section] 1983 action only if Congress clearly intended to create a private right of action with the legislation. The Court concluded that [section] 1983 may not be used to enforce the provisions of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. (3)

Many federal statutes enacted under the spending power, such as provisions of the Social Security Act concerning Medicare and Medicaid, do not expressly provide a private right of action for enforcement. Gonzaga University jeopardizes plaintiffs' ability to sue to enforce these laws. The Court's willingness to find private rights of action under statutes that do not explicitly authorize suits for enforcement has been limited. (4) By restricting the use of [section] 1983, the Court has created a serious new obstacle for civil rights plaintiffs.

Interpretation of [section] 1983

Law students are often surprised to learn that there are literally hundreds of federal laws that do not create a private right of action. Laws to be enforced by federal regulatory agencies often do not expressly authorize suits to enforce their provisions. Criminal laws frequently do not have a comparable civil statute to...