Michael L. Rehberg v. Dept. of Pub. Safety ( 1997 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 96-4258
    ___________
    Michael L. Rehberg, and all other      *
    similarly situated employees;          *
    Keith W. Asleson; Theodore K. Hull,    *
    *
    Appellants,               *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                               * District Court for the
    * Southern District of Iowa.
    Iowa Department of Public Safety,      *
    sued as Department of Public Safety    *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    and the State of Iowa,                 *
    *
    Appellees.                *
    ___________
    Submitted: July 14, 1997
    Filed: July 16, 1997
    ___________
    Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Michael L. Rehberg, Keith W. Asleson, and Theodore K. Hull commenced this
    action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 
    29 U.S.C. §§ 201-19
     (1994) (FLSA),
    against their employer--the Iowa Department of Public Safety (DOS) and the State of
    Iowa--seeking overtime compensation. Upon defendants’ motion, the District Court1
    dismissed the action. The court concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction
    under Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 
    116 S. Ct. 1114
     (1996), as Iowa had not
    consented to the suit; the Commerce Clause did not grant Congress the power to
    abrogate Iowa’s Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit; and the FLSA was enacted
    pursuant to the Commerce Clause. Plaintiffs appeal, arguing that, although the FLSA
    may have been passed pursuant to the Commerce Clause, Congress subsequently
    passed an FLSA amendment abrogating the states’ immunity pursuant to Congress’s
    enforcement power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.
    Appellants’ argument is foreclosed by our recent decision in Raper v. Iowa, 
    115 F.3d 623
    , ____ (8th Cir. 1997). In Raper, we rejected the argument made by Iowa
    employees who were seeking overtime compensation that Congress revoked the states’
    Eleventh Amendment immunity from FLSA lawsuits under the Fourteenth Amendment,
    because we concluded that the FLSA’s overtime provisions cannot be seen as serving
    a Fourteenth Amendment purpose. See 
    id.
     Accordingly, the judgment of the District
    Court is affirmed.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    1
    The Honorable Celeste F. Bremer, United States Magistrate Judge for the
    Southern District of Iowa, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by
    consent of the parties pursuant to 
    28 U.S.C. § 636
    (c) (1994).
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 96-4258

Filed Date: 7/16/1997

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021