The
plaintiffs were disabled Tennesseans who could not access the upper floors in state courthouses. They sued in federal court, arguing that since
Tennessee was denying them public services because of their disabilities, it was violating Title II of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Under Title II, no one can be denied access to public services due to his or her
disability; it allows those whose rights have been violated to
sue states for
money damages. Tennessee argued that the
Eleventh Amendment prohibited the suit, and filed a motion to dismiss the case. It relied principally on
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett (2001), in which the Supreme Court held that Congress had, in enacting certain provisions of the
ADA, unconstitutionally abrogated the
sovereign immunity of the States by letting people sue the States for discrimination on the basis of disability. That case, in turn, relied on the rule laid down by
City of Boerne v. Flores: Congress may abrogate the Eleventh Amendment using its section 5 powers only if the way it seeks to remedy discrimination is "congruent and proportional" to the discrimination itself.
Garrett had held that Congress had not met the congruent-and-proportional test – i.e., that it had not amassed enough evidence of
discrimination on the basis of disability to justify the abrogation of sovereign immunity. ==Opinion of the Court==