U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 21— CIVIL RIGHTS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I–A— INSTITUTIONALIZED PERSONS

42 U.S.C. § 1997a

Initiation of civil actions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Discretionary authority of Attorney General; preconditions

Whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that any State or political subdivision of a State, official, employee, or agent thereof, or other person acting on behalf of a State or political subdivision of a State is subjecting persons residing in or confined to an institution, as defined in section 1997 of this title, to egregious or flagrant conditions which deprive such persons of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States causing such persons to suffer grievous harm, and that such deprivation is pursuant to a pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of such rights, privileges, or immunities, the Attorney General, for or in the name of the United States, may institute a civil action in any appropriate United States district court against such party for such equitable relief as may be appropriate to insure the minimum corrective measures necessary to insure the full enjoyment of such rights, privileges, or immunities, except that such equitable relief shall be available under this subchapter to persons residing in or confined to an institution as defined in section 1997(1)(B)(ii) of this title only insofar as such persons are subjected to conditions which deprive them of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution of the United States.

(b) Discretionary award of attorney fees

In any action commenced under this section, the court may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee against the United States as part of the costs.

(c) Attorney General to personally sign complaint

The Attorney General shall personally sign any complaint filed pursuant to this section.

(Pub. L. 96–247, § 3, May 23, 1980, 94 Stat. 350; Pub. L. 104–134, title I, § 101[(a)] [title VIII, § 803(a)], Apr. 26, 1996, 110 Stat. 1321, 1321–70; renumbered title I, Pub. L. 104–140, § 1(a), May 2, 1996, 110 Stat. 1327.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1996—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–134 amended subsec. (c) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (c) read as follows: “Any complaint filed by the Attorney General pursuant to this section shall be personally signed by him.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 71 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: United States v. Erie Cnty., Ny, 724 F. Supp. 2d 357 (W.D.N.Y. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Erie Cnty., Ny, 724 F. Supp. 2d 357 (W.D.N.Y. 2010). · cites it 15× “CRIPA The CRIPA authorizes the United States to seek injunctive relief against any state, political subdivision of a state, or official, employee, or agent thereof, whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that such party is subjecting institutionalized…”
Napier v. Laurel Cnty., 636 F.3d 218 (6th Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “See 42 U.S.C. § 1997a. The "dominant concern" of the PLRA is "to promote administrative redress, filter out groundless claims, and foster better prepared litigation of claims aired in court.”
Marek v. Chesny, 473 U.S. 1 (1985). · cites it 2× “350 -351, 42 U. S. C. §§ 1997a(b), 1997c(d). 41. Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat.”
United States v. Territory of the Virgin Islands Ex Rel. DiRuzzo, 748 F.3d 514 (3rd Cir. 2014). · cites it 3× “§ 1612 and 42 U.S.C. § 1997a. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.”
United States v. Erie Cnty., 763 F.3d 235 (2d Cir. 2014). “The action was brought pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. § 1997a et seq. 3 . Since the suicide prevention settlement was incorporated in this agreement, the above referenced compliance consultants would also replace the compliance…”
Shook v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 543 F.3d 597 (10th Cir. 2008). “” 42 U.S.C. § 1997a. While the statute places some preconditions on the Attorney General’s ability to bring suit, such as, inter alia, a requirement that the Attorney General first notify state officials of the allegedly illegal conditions, 42 U.”
United States v. Com. of Pennsylvania, 902 F. Supp. 565 (W.D. Pa. 1995). · cites it 6× “CRIPA Actions The Commonwealth submits that the standard of proof in this CRIPA action requires the United States to satisfy five elements set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 1997a. According to the Commonwealth, the United States must demonstrate: 1.”
David R. Ruiz, United States of Am., Intervenor-Appellee v. W. J. Estelle, Jr., 679 F.2d 1115 (5th Cir. 1982). “42 U.S.C.A. § 1997a. 70 . Central Freight Lines, Inc.”
McCarthy v. Bronson, 500 U.S. 136 (1991). “§ 4013 (a)(4) (authorizing Attorney General to enter into contracts “to establish acceptable conditions of confinement” in state facilities housing federal detainees); 42 U. S. C. §§1997a(a), 1997c(a)(1) (authorizing Attorney General to initiate, or intervene in, injunctive…”
Alexander S. v. Boyd, 113 F.3d 1373 (4th Cir. 1997). · cites it 4× “If private attorneys find that fee limitations hinder their ability effectively to litigate these cases, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1997a (West 1994 & Supp.1997), left intact by the PLRA, authorizes the Attorney General to institute actions on behalf of persons residing in or confined to a…”
Abbott v. G.G.E, 463 S.W.3d 633 (Tex. App. 2015). “Prior Department of Justice Investigation In March 2005, pursuant to its authority under the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act, see 42 U.S.C. § 1997a, the United States Department of Justice began an investigation of conditions at the Texas SSLCs.”
United States v. Michigan, 116 F.R.D. 655 (W.D. Mich. 1987). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 1997a(a). Congress enacted CRIPA because institutionalized persons often lack the resources and the ability to protect their constitutional rights and the Department of Justice has the ability to act on their behalf.”
Show all 71 citing cases →
— 42 U.S.C. § 1997a(a) — 31 cases
United States v. Erie Cnty., Ny, 724 F. Supp. 2d 357 (W.D.N.Y. 2010). “CRIPA The CRIPA authorizes the United States to seek injunctive relief against any state, political subdivision of a state, or official, employee, or agent thereof, whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that such party is subjecting institutionalized…”
United States v. Territory of the Virgin Islands Ex Rel. DiRuzzo, 748 F.3d 514 (3rd Cir. 2014). “§ 1612 and 42 U.S.C. § 1997a. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.”
McCarthy v. Bronson, 500 U.S. 136 (1991). “§ 4013 (a)(4) (authorizing Attorney General to enter into contracts “to establish acceptable conditions of confinement” in state facilities housing federal detainees); 42 U. S. C. §§1997a(a), 1997c(a)(1) (authorizing Attorney General to initiate, or intervene in, injunctive…”
United States v. Com. of Pennsylvania, 902 F. Supp. 565 (W.D. Pa. 1995). “CRIPA Actions The Commonwealth submits that the standard of proof in this CRIPA action requires the United States to satisfy five elements set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 1997a. According to the Commonwealth, the United States must demonstrate: 1.”
United States v. Michigan, 116 F.R.D. 655 (W.D. Mich. 1987). “42 U.S.C. § 1997a(a). Congress enacted CRIPA because institutionalized persons often lack the resources and the ability to protect their constitutional rights and the Department of Justice has the ability to act on their behalf.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 1997a(b) — 3 cases
Marek v. Chesny, 473 U.S. 1 (1985). “350 -351, 42 U. S. C. §§ 1997a(b), 1997c(d). 41. Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat.”
Kenny A. Ex Rel. Winn v. Perdue, 547 F.3d 1319 (11th Cir. 2008).
Kenny A. v. Sonny Perdue (11th Cir. 2008).
— 42 U.S.C. § 1997a(c) — 3 cases
C.V. ex rel. Wahlquist v. Dudek, 209 F. Supp. 3d 1279 (S.D. Fla. 2016).
Callahan v. Sw. Med. Ctr. of Lawton, 178 F. App'x 837 (10th Cir. 2006).
Thompson v. Detroit Receiving Hosp. (E.D. Mich. 2022).
— 42 U.S.C. § 1997a(e) — 4 cases
Pauls v. Green, 816 F. Supp. 2d 961 (D. Idaho 2011).
Fabacher v. Kent (M.D. La. 2020).
Stewart v. Turn Key Health (W.D. Okla. 2021).
Brown v. State of Mississippi Dep't of Corr., 87 F. App'x 406 (5th Cir. 2004).
— 42 U.S.C. § 1997a(e)(a) — 1 case
Vreeland v. People's Repub. of China (D.D.C. 2021).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.