Missouri Protection & Advocacy Services, Inc. v. Carnahan

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that a “State’s Eleventh Amendment immunity does not bar a suit against a state official to enjoin enforcement of an allegedly unconstitutional statute, provided that such officer has some connection with the enforcement of the act”
• explaining that a “State’s Eleventh Amendment immunity does not bar a suit against a state 14 official to enjoin enforcement of an allegedly unconstitutional statute, provided that such officer has some connection with the enforcement of the act”
• concluding same with respect to Missouri’s P & A system
• concluding same with respect to Missouri’s P&A system
• \Congress has not abrogated prudential standing requirements by expressly authorizing this type of global challenge to [public] programs absent the participation of individuals seeking redress of specific injuries.\
• “[P]robate courts retain the authority to preserve a ward’s right to vote as part of the statutory mandate to minimize deprivation of a ward’s liberty.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).