Greg A. Horton v. State of Alaska Wildwood Correctional Center

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GREG A. HORTON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF ALASKA WILDWOOD
CORRECTIONAL CENTER,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 11-35683
D.C. No. 3:10-cv-00264-HRH
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Alaska
H. Russel Holland, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 30, 2012 **
Anchorage, Alaska
Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
FILED
SEP 05 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

Plaintiff Greg Horton appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his suit
against Defendant State of Alaska Wildwood Correctional Center. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The Supreme Court has already decided the question before us, and has held
that Congress did not validly abrogate the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity
under Title I of the ADA. Bd. of Trustees of the Univ. of Ala. v. Garrett, 531 U.S.
356, 374 (2001).
United States v. Georgia, in which the Supreme Court held that Congress
had validly abrogated the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity through Title II
of the ADA, does not apply to this case. 546 U.S. 151, 159 (2006). The Supreme
Court has explained the “significant differences” between Title I and Title II of the
ADA, and noted that Title II, unlike Title I, looks to enforce a multitude of very
basic constitutional rights, like the right of access to the courts. Tennessee v. Lane,
541 U.S. 509, 522–23 (2004). Thus, Georgia does not apply to this case.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --