The United States v. Georgia et al., 2005, is a Supreme Court case that involved a disabled prisoner who alleged that the State of Georgia violated his rights under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The plaintiff claimed he was subjected to inhumane conditions and treatment due to his paraplegia, including being kept in a cell too small for his wheelchair and denied access to medical facilities. The court ruled unanimously that state prisoners may sue their states for damages if their disabilities are not accommodated as required by ADA. This decision confirmed that Congress has the power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to abrogate state sovereign immunity where there is discrimination against individuals with disabilities.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Georgia et al., Justice Scalia, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O'Connor and Thomas, argued that Congress did not have the authority to abrogate state sovereign immunity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). They contended that while Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment gives Congress power to enforce rights protected by this amendment, it does not extend to granting new substantive rights or expanding existing ones beyond what is constitutionally guaranteed. The dissenters believed that many provisions in Title II do just this - they create new rights rather than enforcing constitutional ones. Therefore, these justices held that such an overreach exceeds congressional authority under Section 5 and infringes upon states' Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in federal court.