Sponsored Links
-->

Saturday, March 3, 2018

Senior Night Graduation Requirements, College Applications, and ...
src: slideplayer.com

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.


Video Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank



Findings

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.


Maps Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank



Implications

The results of the case are cited repeatedly in subsequent patent cases, and criticized.


Reconstruction Amendments - Wikipedia
src: upload.wikimedia.org


References


Propylhexedrine
src: 4.bp.blogspot.com


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


Source of article : Wikipedia