Legal Opinion · Concurrence
Miranda B. v. Kitzhaber
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 14, 2003No. 01-35950Published
1ConcurrenceO’Scannlain, Circuit Judge
I agree with the State of Oregon that if we had treated the issues at hand in the first instance with the thoughtful consideration that they deserved, we would have reached a different result. Nevertheless, I concur in the court’s reasoned decision: our precedent clearly commands the conclusion that Oregon is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity under Title II of the ADA and that the State waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by accepting federal funds.
I write separately not to belabor my reasoning for why I have concluded our precedent is…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Board of Trustees of Univ. of Ala. v. GarrettSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Ricky Crawford v. Indiana Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
- Melinda Erickson, United States of America, Intervenor v. Board of Governors of State Colleges and Universities for Northeastern Illinois UniversityCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000
- Reickenbacker v. FosterCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.