October Term 2002 · Docket 01-1368
Can states deny FMLA leave to fathers?
Nevada denies paternity leave. Hibbs claims the federal law requires it.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Taggart argued Congress failed to abrogate state immunity.
Dinh argued the law targets sex-based discrimination.
Taggart distinguished paternity leave from childbirth leave.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-15 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 15-59 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 15-59
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 1-11 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 1-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 3-5
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests state immunity under the Family and Medical Leave Act.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-15 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 15-59 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 15-59
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 1-11 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 1-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-27
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 15, 2003.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 3-5
What each side wants
Nevada wants to keep its leave rules.
Hibbs wants federal leave rights enforced.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-15 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 15-59 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 15-59
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 1-11 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 1-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-27
What each side says
Nevada argues Congress lacked power to abrogate immunity.
Hibbs argues the law targets sex discrimination.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-15 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 15-59 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 15-59
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 1-11 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 1-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-27
What the justices asked
Rehnquist asked if the case is submitted.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 3-5
Why it matters
This defines state limits on federal leave mandates.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-15 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 15-59 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 15-59
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 1-11 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 1-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-27
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 3-5
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-15 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 15-59 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 15-59
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 1-11 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 1-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-15 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 38, lines 15-59 — Transcript, file page 38, lines 15-59
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 1-11 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 1-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-27
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.