In a landmark 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday struck down Alabama’s exhaustion rule, which required individuals to complete state administrative appeals before filing federal civil rights lawsuits in local courts. The justices ruled the law was an unconstitutional roadblock that violated federal precedent, significantly reshaping how civil rights claims can be pursued.
The ruling delivers a blow to state-mandated procedural hurdles, ensuring that federal civil rights protections remain accessible, even when state systems create delays or roadblocks.
Alabama’s Defense Falls Short
The case originated with Nancy Williams and 21 other Alabamians, who argued that extreme delays in Alabama’s unemployment benefits processing amounted to a violation of their due process rights under the Social Security Act. They pointed to two key Supreme Court precedents—Patsy v. Board of Regents (1982) and Felder v. Casey (1988)—which had previously struck down state exhaustion requirements for federal civil rights claims.
Former Alabama Secretary of Labor Fitzgerald Washington, however, countered that the state’s rule was not an unconstitutional barrier, but rather a jurisdictional guideline for state courts.
Despite this argument, the majority ruled that Alabama’s requirement effectively shielded state officials from accountability, clashing with long-standing federal civil rights protections.
