Cisneros v. Wilson
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
The Supreme Court's decision in Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett displaced Cisneros's holding that Congress validly removed that immunity. Later opinions continue to apply Cisneros's separate rules on disability qualification, reasonable accommodation, and employment retaliation. The confirmed treatment is listed below.
36 later cases cite Cisneros v. Wilson; 36 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on Cisneros v. Wilson?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
Treatments
Overruled in part
-
The Supreme Court displaced Cisneros's holding that states can face private damages suits under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett · Supreme Court of the United States · filed
We decide here whether employees of the State of Alabama may recover money damages by reason of the State’s failure to comply with the provisions of Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA or Act), 104 Stat. 330, 42 U. S. C. §§ 12111-12117.1 We hold that such suits are barred by the Eleventh Amendment.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads Cisneros v. Wilson and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace