Supreme Court allows disabled Georgia inmate to proceed with suit against state

The Supreme Court, in its first federalism decision since John G. Roberts Jr. became chief justice, ruled Tuesday that Congress acted within its constitutional authority when it stripped states of immunity from some suits for damages by disabled prison inmates.

The unanimous opinion, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, overturned a 2004 ruling by the federal appeals court in Atlanta, which held that Georgia was entitled to sovereign immunity from a lawsuit brought by a paraplegic prison inmate under the Americans With Disabilities Act.

Justice Scalia said that at least to the extent that the inmate's claims indicated that prison officials had violated not only the statute but the Constitution itself, the suit could proceed. The inmate, Tony Goodman, says that prison officials have grossly neglected his needs for mobility and personal hygiene, and that his dependence on a wheelchair has left him excluded from the law library and recreational opportunities.

The decision left very significant questions unanswered, most notably the fate of a disability lawsuit that demonstrates violations of the statute but not of any constitutional provision. After Mr. Goodman's lawsuit was thrown out by the Federal District Court in Georgia, the federal government intervened in the case to defend the constitutionality of applying the Americans With Disabilities Act to the states.

Samuel R. Bagenstos, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis, who argued the case for Mr. Goodman, called the decision "an important win." He said it was significant that the court did not insist, as it had in earlier state immunity decisions, on Congress having compiled a record of state constitutional violations in the area under scrutiny.

•	Supreme Court allows disabled Georgia inmate to proceed with suit against state The New York Times, Wednesday, Jan. 11, 2006 Byline: Linda Greenhouse