United States v. Alabama Department of Mental Health & Mental Retardation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding the regulatory term “affect” was ambiguous when the regulation did not specify the types of effects falling within its scope
• noting that if a private citizen had been the plaintiff, \it is undisputed that sovereign immunity would have barred his [USERRA] suit because a State cannot be sued [in federal court] by an individual without its consent\
• “Rule 12(b) requires a defendant to make a motion pursuant to 12(b)(1) or 12(b)(6) prior to filing a responsive pleading.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).