1259:
decision, but relied more broadly on the nature of the bankruptcy power vested in
Congress under Article I. "The question", he stated, " not whether Congress could 'abrogate' state sovereign immunity in the Bankruptcy Act (as Congress had attempted to do); rather, because the history and justification of the Bankruptcy Clause, as well as legislation enacted immediately following ratification, demonstrate that was intended not just as a grant of legislative authority to Congress, but also to authorize limited subordination of state sovereign immunity in the bankruptcy arena." In reaching this conclusion, he acknowledged that the Court's decision in Seminole Tribe and succeeding cases had assumed that those holdings would apply to the Bankruptcy Clause, but stated that the Court was convinced by "areful study and reflection" that "that assumption was erroneous". The Court then crystallized the current rule: when Congressional legislation regulates matters that implicate "a core aspect of the administration of bankrupt estates", sovereign immunity is no longer available to the States if the statute subjects them to private suits.
905:, the court held that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar an individual's suit in federal court against a county for nonpayment of a debt. By contrast, a suit against a statewide agency is considered a suit against the state under the Eleventh Amendment. In allowing suits against counties and municipalities, the court was unanimous, relying in part on its "general acquiescence" in such suits over the prior thirty years. William Fletcher, a professor of legal studies at Yale University, explains the different treatment on the ground that in the nineteenth century, a municipal corporation was viewed as more closely analogous to a private corporation than to a state government.
223:
168:
730:
structure, and its history, and the authoritative interpretations by this Court make clear, the States’ immunity from suit is a fundamental aspect of the sovereignty which the States enjoyed before the ratification of the
Constitution, and which they retain today (either literally or by virtue of their admission into the Union upon an equal footing with the other States) except as altered by the plan of the Convention or certain constitutional Amendments.
1336:, the plaintiff can receive damages despite sovereign immunity. Typically if a party can demonstrate that the government intentionally acted wrongly with the sole purpose of causing damages, that party can recover for injury or economic losses. For example, if access lanes to a major bridge are closed for repair and the closure results in severe traffic congestion, the action was in good faith and the state could not be sued. However, if, as in the
66:
25:
566:, which waives the immunity over claims arising out of contracts to which the federal government is a party. The Federal Tort Claims Act and the Tucker Act are not the broad waivers of sovereign immunity they might appear to be, as there are a number of statutory exceptions and judicially fashioned limiting doctrines applicable to both. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1331 confers federal question
629:, but that statute balances this waiver with provisions that limit the remedies available to the patent holder. The government may not be enjoined from infringing a patent, and persons performing work for the government are immune both from liability and from injunction. Any recourse must be had only against the government in the United States Court of Federal Claims. In
836:
but often impose various procedural prerequisites or require plaintiffs to pursue their claims in a court that specializes in hearing claims against the state government. Such laws often cap the total amount of recoverable damages and prohibit awards of certain types of damages such as punitive damages. They also authorize affirmative defenses like discretionary immunity.
783:(1977) that states are not constitutionally immune from being named in lawsuits filed in other states. In the intervening years, many states developed legislation that recognize sovereign immunity of other states; since 1979, there had only been 14 legal cases that did involve a state being named as a litigant in a case heard in another state. The Supreme Court overturned
806:, which was passed to ensure enlisted personnel would be able to return to their same job or one of similar pay and placement. Texas had argued that they could not be sued under a federal law due to state sovereign immunity, but the majority found that in matters related to the nation's defense, states had given up their sovereign immunity as part of joining the union.
1763: 1994) ("The State next argues that the cause below was barred by the state's sovereign immunity, by an alleged common law rule that no one is entitled to the refund of an illegal tax, and by the requirements of Florida's refund statutes. Even if true, these are not proper reasons to bar a claim based on
711:
sovereignty, and that a State will therefore not be subject to suit in federal court unless it has consented to suit, either expressly or in the "plan of the convention." States may consent to suit, and therefore waive their
Eleventh Amendment immunity by removing a case from state court to federal court. See
826:
rejected those arguments, stating: "Sovereign immunity does not exempt the State from a challenge based on violation of the federal or state constitutions, because any other rule self-evidently would make constitutional law subservient to the State's will. Moreover, neither the common law nor a state
742:
argued that in view of this, and given the limited nature of congressional power delegated by the original unamended
Constitution, the court could not "conclude that the specific Article I powers delegated to Congress necessarily include, by virtue of the Necessary and Proper Clause or otherwise, the
670:
was ratified in response to this ruling, removing federal judicial jurisdiction from lawsuits "prosecuted against one of the United States by
Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State". The validity and retroactivity of the Eleventh Amendment was affirmed in the 1798
518:
Absolute immunity applies to acts that, if subject to challenge, would significantly affect the operation of government, such as would occur if a legislator could be sued for core legislative acts, and is also typically extended to statements made on the floor of the legislature. Similar protections
1767:
concerns. Sovereign immunity does not exempt the State from a challenge based on violation of the federal or state constitutions, because any other rule self-evidently would make constitutional law subservient to the State's will. Moreover, neither the common law nor a state statute can supersede a
970:
have held that, as long as the state entity receives federal funding, then the sovereign immunity for discrimination cases is not abrogated, but voluntarily waived. Since the receiving of the federal funds was optional, then the waiver of sovereign immunity was optional. If a state entity wanted
835:
After the federal government enacted the FTCA in 1946, most (but not all) states have enacted limited statutory waivers of sovereign immunity in the form of state claims acts or state tort claims acts. These laws allow plaintiffs to bring lawsuits against the state and/or its subordinate entities,
1258:
jurisdiction by bankruptcy courts in voiding a preferential transfer to a state. Justice
Stevens, writing for a majority of five (including Justice O'Connor, in one of her last cases before retirement, and Justices Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer), referred to the rationale of an earlier bankruptcy
1214:
Because
Congress' power under §5 is only "the power 'to enforce,' not the power to determine what constitutes a constitutional violation," for the abrogation to be valid, the statute must be remedial or protective of a right protected by the Fourteenth Amendment and "here must be a congruence and
1022:
Under
Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court of the United States has original jurisdiction over cases between states. Congress, if it so chooses, may grant lower federal courts concurrent jurisdiction over cases between states. However, Congress has not yet
888:
The
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of 1976 establishes the limitations as to whether a foreign sovereign nation (or its political subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities) may be sued in U.S. courts—federal or state. It also establishes specific procedures for service of process and
1043:
When a claimant uses this exception, the state cannot be included in the suit; instead, the name of the individual defendant is listed. The claimant cannot seek damages from the state, because the claimant cannot list the state as a party. The claimant can seek prospective, or future, relief by
912:
noted that even without immunity, suits against municipal officials relate to an institution run and funded by the state, and any relief against county or municipal officials that has some significant effect on the state treasury must be considered a suit against the state, and barred under the
710:
we have understood the
Eleventh Amendment to stand not so much for what it says, but for the presupposition of our constitutional structure which it confirms: that the States entered the federal system with their sovereignty intact; that the judicial authority in Article III is limited by this
870:
enjoy immunity from suit—in federal, state, or tribal courts—unless they consent to suit, or unless the federal government abrogates that immunity. However, individual members of the tribe are not immune. Under certain circumstances, a tribal official acting in his or her official
550:
The principle was not mentioned in the original United States Constitution. The courts have recognized it both as a principle that was inherited from English common law, and as a practical, logical inference (that the government cannot be compelled by the courts because it is the power of the
729:
sometimes referred to the States’ immunity from suit as "Eleventh Amendment immunity" phrase is convenient shorthand but something of a misnomer, the sovereign immunity of the States neither derives from nor is limited by the terms of the Eleventh Amendment. Rather, as the Constitution's
1053:
allows federal courts to enjoin the enforcement of unconstitutional state (or federal) statutes on the theory that "immunity does not extend to a person who acts for the state, but acts unconstitutionally, because the state is powerless to authorize the person to act in violation of the
1606:, 514 U.S. 527 (1995). However, in the case of a wrongful levy (rather than an action to remove a tax lien), the Supreme Court held in 2007 that the injured party's remedy would be limited to Internal Revenue Code section 7426(a)(1), and not in section 1346(a)(1) of title 28. See
1018:
Similar to the U.S. v. state exclusion above, a state may also sue another state in the federal court system. Again, there would be a conflict of interest if either state's court system tried the case. Instead, the federal court system provides a neutral forum for the case.
889:
attachment of property for proceedings against a Foreign State. The FSIA provides the exclusive basis and means to bring a lawsuit against a foreign sovereign in the United States. In international law, the prohibition against suing a foreign government is known as
1009:
Because the U.S. is a superior sovereign, it may need to bring suit against a state from time to time. According to the Supreme Court, proper jurisdiction for a contract suit by the United States Federal Government against a state is in Federal District Court.
638:
Section 702 of the Administrative Procedures Act provides a broad waiver of sovereign immunity for actions taken by administrative agencies. It provides that persons suffering a legal wrong because of an agency action are entitled to judicial review.
602:, the U.S. Supreme Court held that in a case where an individual paid a federal tax under protest to remove a federal tax lien on her property where the tax she paid had been assessed against a third party, the waiver of sovereign immunity found in
871:
capacity, and within the scope of his or her statutory authority, may be cloaked with sovereign immunity. But if a tribal official's tortious acts exceed the scope of his or her authority, the official is subject to suit for those acts. See
631:
772:
541:
has sovereign immunity and may not be sued unless it has waived its immunity or consented to suit. The United States as a sovereign is immune from suit unless it unequivocally consents to being sued. The United States Supreme Court in
2328:
865:
The federal government recognizes tribal nations as "domestic dependent nations" and has established a number of laws attempting to clarify the relationship between the federal, state, and tribal governments. Generally speaking,
1093:
can only be for prospective, rather than retrospective, relief; the court reasoned that the Eleventh Amendment's protection of state sovereignty requires the state's coffers to be shielded from suit. Prospective relief includes
699:
re-affirms that states possess sovereign immunity and are therefore immune from being sued in federal court without their consent. In later cases, the Supreme Court has strengthened state sovereign immunity considerably. In
3245:
1001:. Since arbitration is a matter of contract between the parties, agreeing to participate in arbitration constitutes consent to be subject to the arbitrator's jurisdiction, thus constituting a voluntary waiver of immunity.
546:
observed: "It is an axiom of our jurisprudence. The government is not liable to suit unless it consents thereto, and its liability in suit cannot be extended beyond the plain language of the statute authorizing it."
489:—that shields them from lawsuits except in relation to certain actions relating to commercial activity in the United States. The principle of sovereign immunity in US law was inherited from the English common law
1031:
The "stripping doctrine" permits a state official who used his or her position to act illegally to be sued in his or her individual capacity. However, the government itself is still immune from being sued through
1959:
3120:
2543:
1938:
743:
incidental authority to subject the States to private suits as a means of achieving objectives otherwise within the scope of the enumerated powers." Sovereign immunity as interpreted by the Supreme Court in
2535:
1240:
1153:
makes employers generally responsible for the torts of their employees. In the absence of this waiver of sovereign immunity, injured parties would generally have been left without an effective remedy. See
2503:
987:
573:
In Federal tax refund cases filed by taxpayers (as opposed to third parties) against the United States, various courts have indicated that Federal sovereign immunity is waived under subsection (a)(1) of
659:
1803:
702:
1815:
635:, the Federal Circuit expanded the interpretation of this protection to extend to private companies doing work not as contractors, but in which the government participates even indirectly.
2956:
1340:, the lanes were closed in retaliation against a mayor who declined to support a politician's campaign, with the explicit purpose of causing traffic jams, such lawsuits could proceed.
929:
If the state or local government entities receive federal funding for whatever purpose, they cannot claim sovereign immunity if they are sued in federal court for discrimination. The
3301:
3205:
1268:
added this caveat: "We do not mean to suggest that every law labeled a 'bankruptcy' law could, consistent with the Bankruptcy Clause, properly impinge upon state sovereign immunity".
1238:
States can expressly waive sovereign immunity, but do not do so implicitly simply by participating in a commercial enterprise where Congress subjects market participants to lawsuits.
803:
2039:
2948:
456:
2551:
1231:
doctrine, courts must ask whether a statutory remedy has 'congruence and proportionality' to violations of Section 1 rights, as those rights are defined by courts." Althouse,
1040:. Therefore, a claimant may sue an official under this "stripping doctrine" and get around any sovereign immunity that that official might have held with his or her position.
2236:
2084:
2908:
2900:
2527:
2228:
712:
908:
County and municipal officials, when sued in their official capacity, can only be sued for prospective relief under federal law. Under state law, however, the court in
3440:
766:
2916:
2344:
950:
847:
decided that "total governmental immunity does not exist" and would no longer protect the state and other public entities from civil liability for their torts. The
83:
38:
1657:
822:
and, furthermore, that if the tax was unconstitutional, the refund request could not be given because it did not comply with state statutes for tax refunds. The
2076:
1248:
The Court has found that somewhat different rules may apply to Congressional efforts to subject the states to suit in the domain of federal bankruptcy law. In
1186:
508:: When absolute immunity applies, a government actor may not be sued for the allegedly wrongful act, even if that person acted maliciously or in bad faith; and
3333:
2212:
1611:
975:
959:
514:: When qualified immunity applies, the government actor is shielded from liability only if specific conditions are met, as specified in statute or case law.
2884:
2575:
967:
696:
667:
3213:
2196:
814:
State sovereign immunity does not extend to cases where a plaintiff alleges the state's action is in violation of the federal or state constitutions. In
449:
1756:
1658:"U.S. Constitution Annotated --> Amendment XI. SUITS AGAINST STATES STATE --> Sovereign Immunity --> Expansion of the Immunity of the States"
477:, also known as governmental immunity, from lawsuits. Local governments in most jurisdictions enjoy immunity from some forms of suit, particularly in
130:
2812:
2389:
1156:
867:
789:
1221:. But "he ultimate interpretation and determination of the Fourteenth Amendment's substantive meaning remains the province of the Judicial Branch."
102:
3637:
3325:
2828:
2381:
818:, the Florida Department of Revenue claimed that sovereign immunity prevented plaintiffs from bringing a case that alleged that a tax violated the
2145:
1023:
chosen to do so. Thus, the United States Supreme Court currently has original and exclusive jurisdiction over cases between state governments.
2591:
442:
109:
2924:
2732:
2932:
2559:
2204:
760:
570:
on district courts, but this statute has been held not to be a blanket waiver of sovereign immunity on the part of the federal government.
44:
798:
116:
2623:
2406:
1264:
1250:
528:
2836:
2106:
1809:
98:
3405:
3317:
1071:
2088:
860:
538:
3104:
2133:
2101:
230:
2583:
2352:
2248:
1285:
616:
428:
1841:, 605 F.3d 149, 156 (2d Cir. 2010), cert. granted, 131 S. Ct. 459, vacated and remanded, 131 S. Ct. 704 (2011) (per curiam).
770:, and counties are not generally considered to have sovereign immunity, even when they "exercise a 'slice of state power.'"
750:
However, a "consequence of Court's recognition of pre-ratification sovereignty as the source of immunity from suit is that
3349:
2844:
2688:
2423:
287:
1121:
allows state officials to be sued in their individual or official capacities, a principle which was demonstrated again in
779:
Separately, sovereign immunity of a state from lawsuits in other states have been in question. The Supreme Court ruled in
3562:
2471:
2267:
1060:
666:
to the federal courts, allowed lawsuits "between a State and Citizens of another State" as the text reads. In 1795, the
3237:
2639:
2180:
2142:
1778:
1673:
1435:
1134:
994:
692:
621:
604:
575:
1980:
3495:
2080:
1223:
1106:
doctrine "focused attention on the need to abrogate sovereign immunity, which led to the decision two years later in
332:
203:
149:
123:
52:
978:
does not share this ideal. As of 2010, it is the only federal court of appeals to take this approach to the issue.
2599:
1696:
1466:
883:
747:
means a constitutional prohibition of suits against states by its own citizens in state courts and federal courts.
482:
2804:
1724:
2940:
2796:
2631:
2159:
381:
3277:
3229:
2567:
2479:
1821:
87:
3309:
3038:
2663:
2647:
2336:
1337:
307:
1139:
The federal government and nearly every state have passed tort claims acts allowing them to be sued for the
802:(2022), the Court ruled 5–4 that Texas was not immune from a lawsuit filed by a returning veteran under the
3341:
3253:
2724:
2447:
2373:
3022:
2463:
2439:
2364:
1661:
1590:
Roger D. Martin, "Waiver of Sovereign Immunity in Tax Refund Proceedings in Bankruptcy," Vol. 11, No. 1,
1167:, while Congress cannot use its Article I powers to subject states to lawsuits in either federal courts,
945:
419:
298:
793:(Docket 17-1299) that states did enjoy constitutional sovereign immunity from lawsuits in other states.
3578:
2780:
2655:
2259:
2126:
2075:
by the National Attorneys General Training and Research Institute (Publisher), pages: 27, page: 12-21.
1914:
848:
1981:"C & L Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma, 532 U.S. 411 (2001)"
971:
its sovereign immunity back, all they have to do in these circuits is stop receiving federal funding.
934:
3389:
2748:
1169:
673:
367:
322:
2013:
1889:
1533:
3610:
3381:
3030:
2820:
2788:
2495:
2275:
1217:
1215:
proportionality between the injury to be prevented or remedied and the means adopted to that end,"
1128:
1118:
844:
590:), or under section 7422 in conjunction with subsection (a) of Internal Revenue Code section 6532 (
498:, meaning "the king can do no wrong." In some situations, sovereign immunity may be waived by law.
277:
1563:
3594:
3586:
3523:
3165:
2615:
2312:
1289:
998:
555:
76:
921:
There are exceptions to the doctrine of sovereign immunity derived from the Eleventh Amendment:
3357:
3075:
2772:
2511:
2455:
2431:
2188:
1026:
663:
485:
provides foreign governments, including state-owned companies, with a related form of immunity—
312:
3464:
3365:
3197:
3140:
2892:
2876:
2852:
2756:
2716:
2329:
Black & White Taxicab & Transfer Co. v. Brown & Yellow Taxicab & Transfer Co.
2119:
1760:
1615:
1195:
823:
591:
583:
343:
317:
1284:
against the United States are exempt from sovereign immunity. These cases are heard by the
872:
327:
2111:
222:
8:
3181:
3157:
3067:
3014:
2700:
2487:
2171:
1164:
1149:
1033:
654:
414:
404:
399:
360:
1782:
1185:
abrogate a state's sovereign immunity pursuant to the powers granted to it by §5 of the
554:
The United States has waived sovereign immunity to a limited extent, mainly through the
181:
Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.
3570:
3456:
3413:
3269:
3246:
Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church & State
3149:
3050:
2868:
2708:
2607:
2303:
1729:
1701:
1669:
1665:
1618:
1570:
1486:
930:
511:
474:
272:
1203:
The court requires "a clear legislative statement" of intent to abrogate sovereignty,
608:
3602:
3470:
3448:
3432:
3397:
3373:
3128:
2964:
2860:
2764:
2415:
2283:
2220:
1408:
1357:
1254:, the Court held that state sovereign immunity was not implicated by the exercise of
1085:
938:
687:
505:
470:
625:
3507:
2972:
2519:
2291:
2000:
West Virginia v. United States, 479 U.S. 305; 107 S.Ct. 702; 93 L.Ed.2d 639 (1987).
1478:
1281:
809:
252:
595:
587:
579:
3554:
3515:
3261:
3221:
3173:
2740:
1384:
819:
739:
473:, the federal government as well as state and tribal governments generally enjoy
234:
2544:
C & L Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma
1643:
1323:
Any contract that has a provision in it specifically waiving sovereign immunity.
1129:
Suits as to which Congress has abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity
989:
C & L Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma
3285:
3189:
3121:
Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City
3112:
2993:
2320:
1288:, or, for cases involving less than ten thousand dollars, a district court has
1049:
890:
721:
486:
257:
242:
3631:
3096:
3059:
2536:
College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board
1317:
1299:
1241:
College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board
1037:
534:
391:
2504:
Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma
3293:
1079:
rests on a fictional distinction between the official and the State"). The
764:(emphases added). Thus, cities and municipalities lack sovereign immunity,
567:
827:
statute can supersede a provision of the federal or state constitutions."
1804:
C & L Enters., Inc. v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Okla.
1095:
877:
490:
353:
1332:
If a plaintiff can demonstrate that the government's action was done in
954:
seems to nullify this; however, numerous appellate court cases, such as
1490:
1311:
1277:
1233:
Vanguard States, Laggard States: Federalism & Constitutional Rights
1140:
901:
Counties and municipalities are not entitled to sovereign immunity. In
563:
2957:
Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & Mfg.
2014:"Brandon v. Holt, 469 US 464, 105 S. Ct. 873, 83 L. Ed. 2d 878 (1985)"
1143:, but not intentional wrongs, of government employees. The common-law
1915:"Blewett William Thomas, Plaintiff-Appellee v. University of Houston"
1594:, p. 16, at 23, Nat'l Ass'n of Bankr. Trustees (Columbia, S.C. 1995).
1333:
1482:
65:
3087:
3005:
267:
262:
3302:
Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc.
3206:
United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures
1816:
Okla. Tax Comm'n v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Okla.
1777:
1027:
Suits filed against state officials under the "stripping doctrine"
804:
Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act of 1994
1436:"Talking About Speech or Debate: Revisiting Legislative Immunity"
1099:
1044:
asking the court to direct the future behavior of the official.
810:
State actions in violation of the federal or state constitutions
2949:
JPMorgan Chase Bank v. Traffic Stream (BVI) Infrastructure Ltd.
1305:
830:
2552:
Inyo County v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community
2237:
Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.
2067:
Miles McCann, Former NAGTRI Visiting Fellow (November 2017):
1890:"Doe v. State of Nebraska, 345 F.3d 593, 597 (8th Cir. 2003)"
1631:
Advanced Software Design v. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
642:
632:
Advanced Software Design v. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2909:
Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.
2901:
Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle
1725:"Supreme Court Sides With Veteran Hurt by Burn Pits in Iraq"
773:
Lake Country Estates, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
2528:
Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc.
2229:
Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States
2141:
1144:
713:
Lapides v. Board of Regents of University System of Georgia
559:
478:
3441:
County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York State
2345:
Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co.
1939:"GREGORY WARREN, Plaintiff-Appellant, -v- GLENN S. GOORD"
951:
Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett
16:
Legal protection of federal, state and tribal governments
1960:"2d Cir.: Rehab Act claims barred by sovereign immunity"
1783:"Tort Liability of Public Entities and Public Employees"
1467:"Stump v. Sparkman and the History of Judicial Immunity"
1295:
Examples of contracts where immunity is waived include:
1271:
758:
possess immunity from suits authorized by federal law."
582:
in conjunction with Internal Revenue Code section 7422 (
551:
government that creates the courts in the first place).
2073:
NAGTRI Journal, Volume 2, Number 4, November 2017 issue
1827:
Puyallup Tribe, Inc. v. Dep't of Game of State of Wash.
1386:
A Selection of Legal Maxims, Classified and Illustrated
647:
519:
apply to judges who are acting in a judicial capacity.
878:
Foreign sovereign immunity in state and federal courts
3334:
Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn
2213:
England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners
2040:"How to Sue Over the Christie Bridge Scandal and Win"
1098:
and other equitable orders, but would rarely include
1036:. The courts have called this "stripping doctrine" a
1004:
2885:
Oneida Indian Nation of New York v. County of Oneida
2576:
City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York
2197:
Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. City of Thibodaux
3214:
Schlesinger v. Reservists Committee to Stop the War
1768:
provision of the federal or state constitutions.").
1523:
United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 (1980)
873:
Cosentino vs. Fuller, Cal. Ct. App. (May 28, 2015).
90:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
2813:Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mottley
1790:Commission’s Reports, Recommendations, and Studies
2829:American Well Works Co. v. Layne & Bowler Co.
2390:Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.
1069:is a fiction that has been narrowly construed");
1013:
662:of the United States Constitution, which granted
562:act of a federal employee causes damage, and the
3629:
3326:Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency
2382:District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman
1562:Lobato, John; Theodore, Jeffrey (May 14, 2006).
615:Congress has also waived sovereign immunity for
1065:(465 U.S.) ("the authority-stripping theory of
2592:Permanent Mission of India v. City of New York
1831:United States v. U.S. Fidelity & Guar. Co.
1561:
997:held that sovereigns are not immune under the
896:
501:Sovereign immunity falls into two categories:
2925:Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Schor
2733:American Insurance Co. v. 356 Bales of Cotton
2127:
1877:Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman
1839:Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y. v. Madison Cnty.
1327:
522:
450:
2933:Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson
2560:United States v. White Mountain Apache Tribe
2205:United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Ideal Cement Co.
2037:
2031:
1697:"Justices Split Over the Power of Precedent"
916:
854:
831:State statutory waiver of sovereign immunity
761:Northern Ins. Co. of N. Y. v. Chatham County
799:Torres v. Texas Department of Public Safety
493:
53:Learn how and when to remove these messages
2837:Smith v. Kansas City Title & Trust Co.
2624:Republic of Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd.
2134:
2120:
1265:Central Virginia Community College v. Katz
1251:Central Virginia Community College v. Katz
790:Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt
643:State sovereign immunity in federal courts
529:Presidential immunity in the United States
457:
443:
2107:Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act
1810:Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Mfg. Techs., Inc.
204:Learn how and when to remove this message
150:Learn how and when to remove this message
99:"Sovereign immunity in the United States"
3406:FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine
3318:Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation
1865:Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury
1433:
725:, the Court explained that while it has
3638:Sovereign immunity in the United States
1608:EC Term of Years Trust v. United States
861:Tribal sovereignty in the United States
680:
3630:
2102:Former Indian Reservations in Oklahoma
2008:
2006:
1722:
1694:
1235:, 152 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1745, 1780 (2004)
1083:doctrine was narrowed by the court in
703:Blatchford v. Native Village of Noatak
3542:
3493:
2991:
2686:
2584:Dolan v. United States Postal Service
2353:Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States
2157:
2115:
1644:"5 U.S. Code § 702 - Right of review"
1514:, 712 F.2d 490, 507 (D.C. Cir. 1983).
1464:
1382:
1286:United States Court of Federal Claims
1272:Certain contracts with the government
1189:, and thus subject them to lawsuits.
1072:Idaho v. Coeur d'Alene Tribe of Idaho
1058:, 44 Vand. L. Rev. 953, 973 (1991).
429:Adequate and independent state ground
3350:Clapper v. Amnesty International USA
2845:Hartsville Oil Mill v. United States
841:Muskopf v. Corning Hospital District
648:Early history and Eleventh Amendment
161:
88:adding citations to reliable sources
59:
18:
3563:Osborn v. Bank of the United States
3105:Toilet Goods Ass'n, Inc. v. Gardner
2472:Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino
2268:Seneca Nation of Indians v. Christy
2003:
1061:Pennhurst State School and Hospital
652:In 1793, the Supreme Court held in
13:
3238:Pfizer Inc. v. Government of India
2992:
2640:Jam v. International Finance Corp.
2181:Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co.
2061:
1779:California Law Revision Commission
1135:Congressional power of enforcement
1005:Suits brought by the United States
693:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
3649:
2424:The Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon
2038:John Culhane (January 14, 2014).
1837:, 248 U.S. 354 (1919). See also
1752:Department of Revenue v. Kuhnlein
1633:, 583 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
1224:Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents
924:
816:Department of Revenue v. Kuhnlein
558:, which waives the immunity if a
334:Class Action Fairness Act of 2005
34:This article has multiple issues.
2687:
2600:Ali v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
1792:. Vol. 4. pp. 801–886.
1056:Tapping the State Court Resource
913:doctrine of sovereign immunity.
884:Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
849:California Government Claims Act
612:authorized her tax refund suit.
483:Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
221:
166:
64:
23:
2941:Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.
2632:OBB Personenverkehr AG v. Sachs
1994:
1973:
1952:
1931:
1907:
1882:
1870:
1853:
1844:
1796:
1771:
1744:
1716:
1688:
1650:
1636:
1624:
1597:
1584:
1089:, which held that relief under
964:Thomas v. University of Houston
75:needs additional citations for
42:or discuss these issues on the
3278:Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife
3230:Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois
2568:Republic of Austria v. Altmann
2480:Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez
2158:
1822:Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez
1723:Liptak, Adam (June 29, 2022).
1555:
1538:, 174 U.S. 373, 375-76 (1899)"
1526:
1517:
1504:
1458:
1427:
1401:
1376:
1350:
1014:Suits brought by another state
981:
1:
3310:DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno
3039:Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer
2648:Republic of Sudan v. Harrison
2337:Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins
1695:Liptak, Adam (May 13, 2019).
1343:
1338:Fort Lee lane closure scandal
3254:City of Los Angeles v. Lyons
2448:Schillinger v. United States
2374:Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.
1564:"Federal Sovereign Immunity"
1440:Yale Law & Policy Review
7:
3494:
3023:Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez
2464:United States v. Wunderlich
2095:
1662:Legal Information Institute
1465:Block, J. Randolph (1980).
897:Local governmental immunity
706:, the court explained that
10:
3654:
3579:Mistretta v. United States
3543:
2805:Burton v. United States II
2781:City of St. Louis v. Myers
2656:Opati v. Republic of Sudan
2260:Murdock v. City of Memphis
2089:he original online edition
2081:the original print edition
1434:Shenkman, Michael (2013).
1328:Actions taken in bad faith
1132:
881:
858:
617:patent infringement claims
526:
523:Federal sovereign immunity
3549:
3538:
3502:
3489:
3424:
3390:TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez
3139:
3086:
3049:
3004:
3000:
2987:
2797:Burton v. United States I
2749:United States v. Jackalow
2725:Martin v. Hunter's Lessee
2695:
2682:
2400:
2363:
2302:
2247:
2170:
2166:
2153:
1604:United States v. Williams
1227:. Simply put: "Under the
1170:Seminole Tribe v. Florida
1102:. This limitation of the
1054:Constitution." Althouse,
917:Exceptions and abrogation
855:Tribal sovereign immunity
851:was enacted as a result.
734:Writing for the court in
674:Hollingsworth v. Virginia
600:United States v. Williams
175:This article needs to be
3611:Bank Markazi v. Peterson
3382:Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski
3031:Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski
2821:Muskrat v. United States
2789:Barrett v. United States
2496:United States v. Stanley
2276:Fox Film Corp. v. Muller
2251:independent state ground
2069:State Sovereign Immunity
1314:that have not been sent.
1308:of government employees.
1218:City of Boerne v. Flores
903:Lincoln County v. Luning
845:California Supreme Court
787:in its 2019 decision of
767:Jinks v. Richland County
719:(Citations omitted). In
278:Constitutional avoidance
3595:United States v. Hatter
3587:Peretz v. United States
3524:Cramer v. United States
3166:Massachusetts v. Mellon
2917:Thomas v. Union Carbide
2616:United States v. Bormes
2365:Rooker–Feldman doctrine
2313:United States v. Hudson
1863:, 415 U.S. 651 (1974);
1835:Turner v. United States
1833:, 309 U.S. 506 (1940);
1829:, 433 U.S. 165 (1977);
1819:, 498 U.S. 505 (1991);
1813:, 523 U.S. 751 (1998);
1807:, 532 U.S. 411 (2001);
1389:. T. & J.W. Johnson
1383:Broom, Herbert (1845).
1290:concurrent jurisdiction
1114:, supra, at 1791 n.216
999:Federal Arbitration Act
556:Federal Tort Claims Act
3358:Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins
3076:Nixon v. United States
2773:United States v. Klein
2664:Trump v. United States
2512:Saudi Arabia v. Nelson
2456:Feres v. United States
2432:Mississippi v. Johnson
2189:Burford v. Sun Oil Co.
1867:, 323 U.S. 459 (1945).
1825:, 436 U.S. 49 (1978);
1536:Price v. United States
941:explicitly says this.
868:Native American tribes
732:
717:
664:diversity jurisdiction
544:Price v. United States
495:rex non potest peccare
494:
3516:United States v. Burr
3465:Rucho v. Common Cause
3366:Texas v. Pennsylvania
3342:Bond v. United States
3198:Sierra Club v. Morton
2893:Arizona v. New Mexico
2877:Glidden Co. v. Zdanok
2853:Wisconsin v. Illinois
2757:Ex parte Vallandigham
2717:United States v. More
2407:presidential immunity
2083:on July 26, 2020 and
1879:, 465 U.S. 89 (1984).
1761:Florida Supreme Court
1757:646 So.2d 717
1196:Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer
991:, 532 U.S. 411 (2001)
824:Florida Supreme Court
727:
708:
318:Amount in controversy
231:United States federal
2440:United States v. Lee
1850:133 U.S. 529 (1890).
1415:. Cornell Law School
1409:"Qualified immunity"
1364:. Cornell Law School
1358:"Sovereign immunity"
1280:, certain claims of
1187:Fourteenth Amendment
681:Later interpretation
84:improve this article
3182:Altvater v. Freeman
3158:Fairchild v. Hughes
3068:Goldwater v. Carter
3015:DeFunis v. Odegaard
2701:Chisholm v. Georgia
2488:Nixon v. Fitzgerald
1165:abrogation doctrine
1150:respondeat superior
1034:respondeat superior
655:Chisholm v. Georgia
405:Anti-Injunction Act
273:Political questions
3571:Forrester v. White
3457:Vieth v. Jubelirer
3414:Murthy v. Missouri
3270:Diamond v. Charles
3150:Bailiff v. Tipping
3051:Political question
2869:Colegrove v. Green
2709:Marbury v. Madison
2608:Samantar v. Yousuf
2402:Sovereign immunity
2304:Federal common law
2143:U.S. Supreme Court
1730:The New York Times
1702:The New York Times
1670:Cornell University
1666:Cornell Law School
1571:Harvard Law School
931:United States Code
697:Eleventh Amendment
668:Eleventh Amendment
539:federal government
512:Qualified immunity
475:sovereign immunity
410:Sovereign immunity
3625:
3624:
3621:
3620:
3603:Stern v. Marshall
3534:
3533:
3485:
3484:
3481:
3480:
3471:Benisek v. Lamone
3449:Davis v. Bandemer
3398:Biden v. Nebraska
3374:Trump v. New York
3129:Trump v. New York
2983:
2982:
2965:Bowles v. Russell
2861:Crowell v. Benson
2765:Ex parte McCardle
2678:
2677:
2674:
2673:
2416:Little v. Barreme
2284:Harrison v. NAACP
2221:Younger v. Harris
2091:on July 26, 2020.
1861:Edelman v. Jordan
1086:Edelman v. Jordan
756:arms of the State
688:Hans v. Louisiana
609:§ 1346(a)(1)
506:Absolute immunity
471:United States law
467:
466:
376:
375:
253:Advisory opinions
214:
213:
206:
196:
195:
160:
159:
152:
134:
57:
3645:
3540:
3539:
3508:Ex parte Bollman
3491:
3490:
3002:
3001:
2989:
2988:
2973:Patchak v. Zinke
2684:
2683:
2520:Clinton v. Jones
2292:Michigan v. Long
2168:
2167:
2155:
2154:
2136:
2129:
2122:
2113:
2112:
2055:
2054:
2052:
2050:
2035:
2029:
2028:
2026:
2024:
2010:
2001:
1998:
1992:
1991:
1989:
1987:
1977:
1971:
1970:
1968:
1966:
1956:
1950:
1949:
1947:
1945:
1935:
1929:
1928:
1926:
1924:
1919:
1911:
1905:
1904:
1902:
1900:
1886:
1880:
1874:
1868:
1857:
1851:
1848:
1842:
1800:
1794:
1793:
1787:
1775:
1769:
1754:
1748:
1742:
1741:
1739:
1737:
1720:
1714:
1713:
1711:
1709:
1692:
1686:
1685:
1683:
1681:
1676:on April 7, 2020
1672:. Archived from
1654:
1648:
1647:
1640:
1634:
1628:
1622:
1601:
1595:
1588:
1582:
1581:
1579:
1577:
1568:
1559:
1553:
1552:
1550:
1548:
1530:
1524:
1521:
1515:
1508:
1502:
1501:
1499:
1497:
1471:Duke Law Journal
1462:
1456:
1455:
1453:
1451:
1431:
1425:
1424:
1422:
1420:
1405:
1399:
1398:
1396:
1394:
1380:
1374:
1373:
1371:
1369:
1354:
1282:monetary damages
1177:its own courts,
1119:42 U.S.C. § 1983
660:Article III, § 2
628:
611:
497:
459:
452:
445:
335:
308:Federal question
295:
294:
225:
218:
217:
209:
202:
191:
188:
182:
170:
169:
162:
155:
148:
144:
141:
135:
133:
92:
68:
60:
49:
27:
26:
19:
3653:
3652:
3648:
3647:
3646:
3644:
3643:
3642:
3628:
3627:
3626:
3617:
3555:Stuart v. Laird
3545:
3530:
3498:
3477:
3420:
3262:Allen v. Wright
3222:Warth v. Seldin
3174:Ex parte Levitt
3135:
3082:
3045:
2996:
2979:
2741:Sheldon v. Sill
2691:
2670:
2405:
2396:
2359:
2298:
2250:
2243:
2162:
2149:
2140:
2098:
2064:
2062:Further reading
2059:
2058:
2048:
2046:
2036:
2032:
2022:
2020:
2012:
2011:
2004:
1999:
1995:
1985:
1983:
1979:
1978:
1974:
1964:
1962:
1958:
1957:
1953:
1943:
1941:
1937:
1936:
1932:
1922:
1920:
1917:
1913:
1912:
1908:
1898:
1896:
1888:
1887:
1883:
1875:
1871:
1858:
1854:
1849:
1845:
1801:
1797:
1785:
1776:
1772:
1750:
1749:
1745:
1735:
1733:
1721:
1717:
1707:
1705:
1693:
1689:
1679:
1677:
1656:
1655:
1651:
1642:
1641:
1637:
1629:
1625:
1602:
1598:
1589:
1585:
1575:
1573:
1566:
1560:
1556:
1546:
1544:
1532:
1531:
1527:
1522:
1518:
1509:
1505:
1495:
1493:
1483:10.2307/1372180
1463:
1459:
1449:
1447:
1432:
1428:
1418:
1416:
1407:
1406:
1402:
1392:
1390:
1381:
1377:
1367:
1365:
1356:
1355:
1351:
1346:
1330:
1274:
1157:Brandon v. Holt
1137:
1131:
1123:Brandon v. Holt
1112:Vanguard States
1029:
1016:
1007:
984:
956:Doe v. Nebraska
939:Section 2000d-7
927:
919:
899:
886:
880:
863:
857:
833:
820:Commerce Clause
812:
740:Anthony Kennedy
683:
650:
645:
620:
603:
598:). Further, in
531:
525:
463:
434:
431:
333:
282:
235:civil procedure
233:
210:
199:
198:
197:
192:
186:
183:
180:
171:
167:
156:
145:
139:
136:
93:
91:
81:
69:
28:
24:
17:
12:
11:
5:
3651:
3641:
3640:
3623:
3622:
3619:
3618:
3616:
3615:
3607:
3599:
3591:
3583:
3575:
3567:
3559:
3550:
3547:
3546:
3536:
3535:
3532:
3531:
3529:
3528:
3520:
3512:
3503:
3500:
3499:
3487:
3486:
3483:
3482:
3479:
3478:
3476:
3475:
3461:
3453:
3445:
3437:
3433:Hayburn's Case
3428:
3426:
3422:
3421:
3419:
3418:
3410:
3402:
3394:
3386:
3378:
3370:
3362:
3354:
3346:
3338:
3330:
3322:
3314:
3306:
3298:
3290:
3286:Raines v. Byrd
3282:
3274:
3266:
3258:
3250:
3242:
3234:
3226:
3218:
3210:
3202:
3194:
3190:Flast v. Cohen
3186:
3178:
3170:
3162:
3154:
3145:
3143:
3137:
3136:
3134:
3133:
3125:
3117:
3113:Laird v. Tatum
3109:
3101:
3092:
3090:
3084:
3083:
3081:
3080:
3072:
3064:
3055:
3053:
3047:
3046:
3044:
3043:
3035:
3027:
3019:
3010:
3008:
2998:
2997:
2994:Justiciability
2985:
2984:
2981:
2980:
2978:
2977:
2969:
2961:
2953:
2945:
2937:
2929:
2921:
2913:
2905:
2897:
2889:
2881:
2873:
2865:
2857:
2849:
2841:
2833:
2825:
2817:
2809:
2801:
2793:
2785:
2777:
2769:
2761:
2753:
2745:
2737:
2729:
2721:
2713:
2705:
2696:
2693:
2692:
2680:
2679:
2676:
2675:
2672:
2671:
2669:
2668:
2660:
2652:
2644:
2636:
2628:
2620:
2612:
2604:
2596:
2588:
2580:
2572:
2564:
2556:
2548:
2540:
2532:
2524:
2516:
2508:
2500:
2492:
2484:
2476:
2468:
2460:
2452:
2444:
2436:
2428:
2420:
2411:
2409:
2398:
2397:
2395:
2394:
2386:
2378:
2369:
2367:
2361:
2360:
2358:
2357:
2349:
2341:
2333:
2325:
2321:Swift v. Tyson
2317:
2308:
2306:
2300:
2299:
2297:
2296:
2288:
2280:
2272:
2264:
2255:
2253:
2245:
2244:
2242:
2241:
2233:
2225:
2217:
2209:
2201:
2193:
2185:
2176:
2174:
2164:
2163:
2151:
2150:
2139:
2138:
2131:
2124:
2116:
2110:
2109:
2104:
2097:
2094:
2093:
2092:
2063:
2060:
2057:
2056:
2030:
2018:Google Scholar
2002:
1993:
1972:
1951:
1930:
1906:
1894:Google Scholar
1881:
1869:
1852:
1843:
1795:
1770:
1765:constitutional
1743:
1715:
1687:
1649:
1635:
1623:
1596:
1583:
1554:
1542:Google Scholar
1525:
1516:
1503:
1477:(5): 879–925.
1457:
1426:
1400:
1375:
1348:
1347:
1345:
1342:
1329:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1321:
1315:
1309:
1303:
1276:By way of the
1273:
1270:
1246:
1245:
1236:
1229:City of Boerne
1212:
1130:
1127:
1050:Ex parte Young
1028:
1025:
1015:
1012:
1006:
1003:
983:
980:
926:
925:Discrimination
923:
918:
915:
898:
895:
891:state immunity
882:Main article:
879:
876:
859:Main article:
856:
853:
843:decision, the
832:
829:
811:
808:
781:Nevada v. Hall
745:Alden v. Maine
722:Alden v. Maine
695:held that the
682:
679:
649:
646:
644:
641:
626:§ 1498(a)
592:26 U.S.C.
584:26 U.S.C.
576:28 U.S.C.
524:
521:
516:
515:
509:
487:state immunity
465:
464:
462:
461:
454:
447:
439:
436:
435:
433:
432:
427:
425:
421:Rooker–Feldman
417:
412:
407:
402:
397:
388:
385:
384:
378:
377:
374:
373:
372:
371:
364:
357:
347:
346:
340:
339:
338:
337:
330:
325:
320:
315:
310:
302:
301:
299:Subject-matter
291:
290:
284:
283:
281:
280:
275:
270:
265:
260:
255:
249:
246:
245:
243:Justiciability
239:
238:
227:
226:
212:
211:
194:
193:
174:
172:
165:
158:
157:
72:
70:
63:
58:
32:
31:
29:
22:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3650:
3639:
3636:
3635:
3633:
3613:
3612:
3608:
3605:
3604:
3600:
3597:
3596:
3592:
3589:
3588:
3584:
3581:
3580:
3576:
3573:
3572:
3568:
3565:
3564:
3560:
3557:
3556:
3552:
3551:
3548:
3541:
3537:
3526:
3525:
3521:
3518:
3517:
3513:
3510:
3509:
3505:
3504:
3501:
3497:
3492:
3488:
3473:
3472:
3467:
3466:
3462:
3459:
3458:
3454:
3451:
3450:
3446:
3443:
3442:
3438:
3435:
3434:
3430:
3429:
3427:
3423:
3416:
3415:
3411:
3408:
3407:
3403:
3400:
3399:
3395:
3392:
3391:
3387:
3384:
3383:
3379:
3376:
3375:
3371:
3368:
3367:
3363:
3360:
3359:
3355:
3352:
3351:
3347:
3344:
3343:
3339:
3336:
3335:
3331:
3328:
3327:
3323:
3320:
3319:
3315:
3312:
3311:
3307:
3304:
3303:
3299:
3296:
3295:
3291:
3288:
3287:
3283:
3280:
3279:
3275:
3272:
3271:
3267:
3264:
3263:
3259:
3256:
3255:
3251:
3248:
3247:
3243:
3240:
3239:
3235:
3232:
3231:
3227:
3224:
3223:
3219:
3216:
3215:
3211:
3208:
3207:
3203:
3200:
3199:
3195:
3192:
3191:
3187:
3184:
3183:
3179:
3176:
3175:
3171:
3168:
3167:
3163:
3160:
3159:
3155:
3152:
3151:
3147:
3146:
3144:
3142:
3138:
3131:
3130:
3126:
3123:
3122:
3118:
3115:
3114:
3110:
3107:
3106:
3102:
3099:
3098:
3097:Poe v. Ullman
3094:
3093:
3091:
3089:
3085:
3078:
3077:
3073:
3070:
3069:
3065:
3062:
3061:
3060:Baker v. Carr
3057:
3056:
3054:
3052:
3048:
3041:
3040:
3036:
3033:
3032:
3028:
3025:
3024:
3020:
3017:
3016:
3012:
3011:
3009:
3007:
3003:
2999:
2995:
2990:
2986:
2975:
2974:
2970:
2967:
2966:
2962:
2959:
2958:
2954:
2951:
2950:
2946:
2943:
2942:
2938:
2935:
2934:
2930:
2927:
2926:
2922:
2919:
2918:
2914:
2911:
2910:
2906:
2903:
2902:
2898:
2895:
2894:
2890:
2887:
2886:
2882:
2879:
2878:
2874:
2871:
2870:
2866:
2863:
2862:
2858:
2855:
2854:
2850:
2847:
2846:
2842:
2839:
2838:
2834:
2831:
2830:
2826:
2823:
2822:
2818:
2815:
2814:
2810:
2807:
2806:
2802:
2799:
2798:
2794:
2791:
2790:
2786:
2783:
2782:
2778:
2775:
2774:
2770:
2767:
2766:
2762:
2759:
2758:
2754:
2751:
2750:
2746:
2743:
2742:
2738:
2735:
2734:
2730:
2727:
2726:
2722:
2719:
2718:
2714:
2711:
2710:
2706:
2703:
2702:
2698:
2697:
2694:
2690:
2685:
2681:
2666:
2665:
2661:
2658:
2657:
2653:
2650:
2649:
2645:
2642:
2641:
2637:
2634:
2633:
2629:
2626:
2625:
2621:
2618:
2617:
2613:
2610:
2609:
2605:
2602:
2601:
2597:
2594:
2593:
2589:
2586:
2585:
2581:
2578:
2577:
2573:
2570:
2569:
2565:
2562:
2561:
2557:
2554:
2553:
2549:
2546:
2545:
2541:
2538:
2537:
2533:
2530:
2529:
2525:
2522:
2521:
2517:
2514:
2513:
2509:
2506:
2505:
2501:
2498:
2497:
2493:
2490:
2489:
2485:
2482:
2481:
2477:
2474:
2473:
2469:
2466:
2465:
2461:
2458:
2457:
2453:
2450:
2449:
2445:
2442:
2441:
2437:
2434:
2433:
2429:
2426:
2425:
2421:
2418:
2417:
2413:
2412:
2410:
2408:
2403:
2399:
2392:
2391:
2387:
2384:
2383:
2379:
2376:
2375:
2371:
2370:
2368:
2366:
2362:
2355:
2354:
2350:
2347:
2346:
2342:
2339:
2338:
2334:
2331:
2330:
2326:
2323:
2322:
2318:
2315:
2314:
2310:
2309:
2307:
2305:
2301:
2294:
2293:
2289:
2286:
2285:
2281:
2278:
2277:
2273:
2270:
2269:
2265:
2262:
2261:
2257:
2256:
2254:
2252:
2246:
2239:
2238:
2234:
2231:
2230:
2226:
2223:
2222:
2218:
2215:
2214:
2210:
2207:
2206:
2202:
2199:
2198:
2194:
2191:
2190:
2186:
2183:
2182:
2178:
2177:
2175:
2173:
2169:
2165:
2161:
2156:
2152:
2147:
2144:
2137:
2132:
2130:
2125:
2123:
2118:
2117:
2114:
2108:
2105:
2103:
2100:
2099:
2090:
2086:
2082:
2078:
2074:
2070:
2066:
2065:
2045:
2041:
2034:
2019:
2015:
2009:
2007:
1997:
1982:
1976:
1961:
1955:
1940:
1934:
1916:
1910:
1895:
1891:
1885:
1878:
1873:
1866:
1862:
1856:
1847:
1840:
1836:
1832:
1828:
1824:
1823:
1818:
1817:
1812:
1811:
1806:
1805:
1799:
1791:
1784:
1780:
1774:
1766:
1762:
1758:
1753:
1747:
1732:
1731:
1726:
1719:
1704:
1703:
1698:
1691:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1663:
1659:
1653:
1645:
1639:
1632:
1627:
1620:
1617:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1600:
1593:
1587:
1572:
1565:
1558:
1543:
1539:
1537:
1529:
1520:
1513:
1507:
1492:
1488:
1484:
1480:
1476:
1472:
1468:
1461:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1430:
1414:
1410:
1404:
1388:
1387:
1379:
1363:
1359:
1353:
1349:
1341:
1339:
1335:
1322:
1319:
1316:
1313:
1310:
1307:
1304:
1301:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1293:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1269:
1267:
1266:
1262:The Court in
1260:
1257:
1253:
1252:
1243:
1242:
1237:
1234:
1230:
1226:
1225:
1220:
1219:
1213:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1198:
1197:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1176:
1172:
1171:
1166:
1161:
1159:
1158:
1152:
1151:
1146:
1142:
1136:
1126:
1124:
1120:
1115:
1113:
1110:." Althouse,
1109:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1092:
1088:
1087:
1082:
1078:
1074:
1073:
1068:
1064:
1062:
1057:
1052:
1051:
1047:For example,
1045:
1041:
1039:
1038:legal fiction
1035:
1024:
1020:
1011:
1002:
1000:
996:
995:Supreme Court
992:
990:
979:
977:
974:However, the
972:
969:
965:
961:
957:
953:
952:
947:
946:Supreme Court
942:
940:
936:
932:
922:
914:
911:
906:
904:
894:
892:
885:
875:
874:
869:
862:
852:
850:
846:
842:
837:
828:
825:
821:
817:
807:
805:
801:
800:
794:
792:
791:
786:
782:
777:
775:
774:
769:
768:
763:
762:
757:
753:
748:
746:
741:
737:
731:
726:
724:
723:
716:
714:
707:
705:
704:
698:
694:
690:
689:
678:
676:
675:
669:
665:
661:
657:
656:
640:
636:
634:
633:
627:
623:
618:
613:
610:
606:
601:
597:
593:
589:
585:
581:
577:
571:
569:
565:
561:
557:
552:
548:
545:
540:
536:
535:United States
530:
520:
513:
510:
507:
504:
503:
502:
499:
496:
492:
488:
484:
480:
476:
472:
460:
455:
453:
448:
446:
441:
440:
438:
437:
430:
426:
424:
422:
418:
416:
413:
411:
408:
406:
403:
401:
398:
396:
394:
390:
389:
387:
386:
383:
380:
379:
370:
369:
365:
363:
362:
358:
356:
355:
351:
350:
349:
348:
345:
342:
341:
336:
331:
329:
326:
324:
321:
319:
316:
314:
311:
309:
306:
305:
304:
303:
300:
297:
296:
293:
292:
289:
286:
285:
279:
276:
274:
271:
269:
266:
264:
261:
259:
256:
254:
251:
250:
248:
247:
244:
241:
240:
236:
232:
229:
228:
224:
220:
219:
216:
208:
205:
190:
178:
173:
164:
163:
154:
151:
143:
132:
129:
125:
122:
118:
115:
111:
108:
104:
101: –
100:
96:
95:Find sources:
89:
85:
79:
78:
73:This article
71:
67:
62:
61:
56:
54:
47:
46:
41:
40:
35:
30:
21:
20:
3609:
3601:
3593:
3585:
3577:
3569:
3561:
3553:
3522:
3514:
3506:
3469:
3463:
3455:
3447:
3439:
3431:
3412:
3404:
3396:
3388:
3380:
3372:
3364:
3356:
3348:
3340:
3332:
3324:
3316:
3308:
3300:
3294:FEC v. Akins
3292:
3284:
3276:
3268:
3260:
3252:
3244:
3236:
3228:
3220:
3212:
3204:
3196:
3188:
3180:
3172:
3164:
3156:
3148:
3127:
3119:
3111:
3103:
3095:
3074:
3066:
3058:
3037:
3029:
3021:
3013:
2971:
2963:
2955:
2947:
2939:
2931:
2923:
2915:
2907:
2899:
2891:
2883:
2875:
2867:
2859:
2851:
2843:
2835:
2827:
2819:
2811:
2803:
2795:
2787:
2779:
2771:
2763:
2755:
2747:
2739:
2731:
2723:
2715:
2707:
2699:
2689:Jurisdiction
2662:
2654:
2646:
2638:
2630:
2622:
2614:
2606:
2598:
2590:
2582:
2574:
2566:
2558:
2550:
2542:
2534:
2526:
2518:
2510:
2502:
2494:
2486:
2478:
2470:
2462:
2454:
2446:
2438:
2430:
2422:
2414:
2401:
2388:
2380:
2372:
2351:
2343:
2335:
2327:
2319:
2311:
2290:
2282:
2274:
2266:
2258:
2249:Adequate and
2235:
2227:
2219:
2211:
2203:
2195:
2187:
2179:
2072:
2068:
2047:. Retrieved
2043:
2033:
2021:. Retrieved
2017:
1996:
1984:. Retrieved
1975:
1963:. Retrieved
1954:
1942:. Retrieved
1933:
1921:. Retrieved
1909:
1897:. Retrieved
1893:
1884:
1876:
1872:
1864:
1860:
1855:
1846:
1838:
1834:
1830:
1826:
1820:
1814:
1808:
1802:
1798:
1789:
1773:
1764:
1751:
1746:
1734:. Retrieved
1728:
1718:
1706:. Retrieved
1700:
1690:
1678:. Retrieved
1674:the original
1652:
1638:
1630:
1626:
1621: (2007).
1607:
1603:
1599:
1591:
1586:
1574:. Retrieved
1557:
1547:November 18,
1545:. Retrieved
1541:
1535:
1528:
1519:
1512:Gray v. Bell
1511:
1506:
1494:. Retrieved
1474:
1470:
1460:
1448:. Retrieved
1443:
1439:
1429:
1417:. Retrieved
1412:
1403:
1391:. Retrieved
1385:
1378:
1366:. Retrieved
1361:
1352:
1331:
1294:
1275:
1263:
1261:
1255:
1249:
1247:
1239:
1232:
1228:
1222:
1216:
1208:
1204:
1194:
1190:
1182:
1181:, supra, it
1178:
1174:
1168:
1162:
1155:
1148:
1147:doctrine of
1138:
1122:
1116:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1090:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1070:
1066:
1063:v. Halderman
1059:
1055:
1048:
1046:
1042:
1030:
1021:
1017:
1008:
988:
985:
973:
963:
955:
949:
948:decision of
943:
928:
920:
909:
907:
902:
900:
887:
864:
840:
839:In the 1961
838:
834:
815:
813:
797:
795:
788:
784:
780:
778:
771:
765:
759:
755:
751:
749:
744:
735:
733:
728:
720:
718:
709:
701:
686:
684:
672:
653:
651:
637:
630:
614:
599:
572:
568:jurisdiction
553:
549:
543:
532:
517:
500:
468:
420:
409:
392:
368:Quasi in rem
366:
359:
352:
323:Supplemental
288:Jurisdiction
215:
200:
187:October 2016
184:
176:
146:
137:
127:
120:
113:
106:
94:
82:Please help
77:verification
74:
50:
43:
37:
36:Please help
33:
2146:Article III
2049:January 25,
1859:See, e.g.,
1759:, 721 (
1312:Tax refunds
1199:. However:
1108:Fitzpatrick
1096:injunctions
982:Arbitration
976:2nd Circuit
968:5th Circuit
960:8th Circuit
754:States and
596:§ 6532
588:§ 7422
580:§ 1346
491:legal maxim
354:In personam
2172:Abstention
2160:Federalism
2023:October 1,
1986:August 20,
1965:August 26,
1944:August 26,
1923:October 1,
1899:October 1,
1576:August 21,
1496:October 1,
1450:October 1,
1419:October 1,
1393:October 1,
1368:October 1,
1344:References
1320:contracts.
1318:Commercial
1278:Tucker Act
1205:Blatchford
1175:a fortiori
1163:Under the
1141:negligence
1133:See also:
738:, Justice
564:Tucker Act
527:See also:
415:Abrogation
400:Abstention
382:Federalism
110:newspapers
39:improve it
2044:Slate.com
1334:bad faith
1302:incurred.
1207:, supra;
1193:, supra;
944:The 2001
910:Pennhurst
622:28 U.S.C.
605:28 U.S.C.
313:Diversity
237:doctrines
140:July 2009
45:talk page
3632:Category
3141:Standing
3088:Ripeness
3006:Mootness
2148:case law
2096:See also
2085:archived
2077:Archived
1781:(1963).
1736:June 30,
1680:July 26,
1446:(2): 351
1306:Salaries
1211:, supra.
1209:Seminole
1191:Seminole
935:Title 42
560:tortious
423:doctrine
395:doctrine
344:Personal
268:Mootness
263:Ripeness
258:Standing
3496:Treason
2087:from t
1708:May 15,
1592:NABTalk
1491:1372180
1100:damages
966:of the
958:in the
533:In the
328:Removal
177:updated
124:scholar
3614:(2016)
3606:(2011)
3598:(2001)
3590:(1991)
3582:(1989)
3574:(1988)
3566:(1824)
3558:(1803)
3544:Others
3527:(1945)
3519:(1807)
3511:(1807)
3474:(2019)
3460:(2004)
3452:(1986)
3444:(1985)
3436:(1792)
3425:Others
3417:(2024)
3409:(2024)
3401:(2023)
3393:(2021)
3385:(2021)
3377:(2020)
3369:(2020)
3361:(2016)
3353:(2013)
3345:(2011)
3337:(2011)
3329:(2007)
3321:(2007)
3313:(2006)
3305:(2000)
3297:(1998)
3289:(1997)
3281:(1992)
3273:(1986)
3265:(1984)
3257:(1983)
3249:(1982)
3241:(1978)
3233:(1977)
3225:(1975)
3217:(1974)
3209:(1973)
3201:(1972)
3193:(1968)
3185:(1943)
3177:(1937)
3169:(1923)
3161:(1922)
3153:(1805)
3132:(2020)
3124:(1985)
3116:(1972)
3108:(1967)
3100:(1961)
3079:(1993)
3071:(1979)
3063:(1962)
3042:(2023)
3034:(2021)
3026:(2016)
3018:(1974)
2976:(2018)
2968:(2007)
2960:(2005)
2952:(2002)
2944:(1995)
2936:(1986)
2928:(1986)
2920:(1985)
2912:(1982)
2904:(1977)
2896:(1976)
2888:(1974)
2880:(1962)
2872:(1946)
2864:(1932)
2856:(1929)
2848:(1926)
2840:(1921)
2832:(1916)
2824:(1911)
2816:(1908)
2808:(1906)
2800:(1905)
2792:(1898)
2784:(1885)
2776:(1871)
2768:(1869)
2760:(1864)
2752:(1862)
2744:(1850)
2736:(1828)
2728:(1816)
2720:(1805)
2712:(1803)
2704:(1793)
2667:(2024)
2659:(2020)
2651:(2019)
2643:(2019)
2635:(2015)
2627:(2014)
2619:(2012)
2611:(2010)
2603:(2008)
2595:(2007)
2587:(2006)
2579:(2005)
2571:(2004)
2563:(2003)
2555:(2003)
2547:(2001)
2539:(1999)
2531:(1998)
2523:(1997)
2515:(1993)
2507:(1991)
2499:(1987)
2491:(1982)
2483:(1978)
2475:(1964)
2467:(1951)
2459:(1950)
2451:(1894)
2443:(1882)
2435:(1867)
2427:(1812)
2419:(1804)
2393:(2005)
2385:(1983)
2377:(1923)
2356:(1943)
2348:(1938)
2340:(1938)
2332:(1928)
2324:(1842)
2316:(1812)
2295:(1983)
2287:(1959)
2279:(1935)
2271:(1896)
2263:(1875)
2240:(1983)
2232:(1976)
2224:(1971)
2216:(1964)
2208:(1962)
2200:(1959)
2192:(1943)
2184:(1941)
2071:. In:
1755:,
1660:. The
1610:,
1489:
1256:in rem
993:, the
785:Nevada
691:, the
624:
619:under
607:
594:
586:
578:
537:, the
481:. The
361:In rem
126:
119:
112:
105:
97:
2079:from
1918:(PDF)
1786:(PDF)
1664:from
1614:
1567:(PDF)
1487:JSTOR
1300:Debts
1179:Alden
1173:, or
1104:Young
1091:Young
1081:Young
1077:Young
1067:Young
736:Alden
671:case
658:that
131:JSTOR
117:books
2051:2014
2025:2017
1988:2011
1967:2010
1946:2010
1925:2017
1901:2017
1738:2022
1710:2019
1682:2020
1616:U.S.
1578:2014
1549:2017
1510:See
1498:2017
1475:1980
1452:2017
1421:2017
1395:2017
1370:2017
1145:tort
1117:The
962:and
752:only
479:tort
393:Erie
103:news
2404:and
1668:at
1619:429
1612:550
1479:doi
1413:Wex
1362:Wex
1183:can
986:In
796:In
685:In
469:In
86:by
3634::
3468:/
2042:.
2016:.
2005:^
1892:.
1788:.
1727:.
1699:.
1569:.
1540:.
1485:.
1473:.
1469:.
1444:32
1442:.
1438:.
1411:.
1360:.
1292:.
1160:.
1125:.
1075:("
937:,
933:,
893:.
776:.
677:.
48:.
2135:e
2128:t
2121:v
2053:.
2027:.
1990:.
1969:.
1948:.
1927:.
1903:.
1740:.
1712:.
1684:.
1646:.
1580:.
1551:.
1534:"
1500:.
1481::
1454:.
1423:.
1397:.
1372:.
1244:.
715:.
458:e
451:t
444:v
207:)
201:(
189:)
185:(
179:.
153:)
147:(
142:)
138:(
128:·
121:·
114:·
107:·
80:.
55:)
51:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
