Sovereign Immunity and the 11th amendment

[Blalron]

I have some problems with the concept of sovereign immunity that the 11th amendment secured for the states.

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

As far as I can tell, there are no exceptions to this except for violations of civil rights (covered by the 14th).

Here’s a hypothetical situation: Let’s say I live in Oregon and I’m right across the border from Washington. Washington calls me up and wants to order a 100 boxes of widgets and 200 boxes of gadgets from me. They promise to pay me one week after the boxes are delivered.

So I deliver the boxes of widgets, gadgets, and whatyamallits and patiently wait for my money. But it doesn’t come. I call them and they say “We decided not to pay you.”

I file suit in federal court to get my money, but the case gets thrown out on 11th amendment grounds.

How would that be fair?

[Bryan_Ekers]

You mean the purchaser is the state of Washington, presumably a government agency? Tricky. You’d have to file suit in state court, I guess.

The 11th was designed to limit the power of the federal Supreme Court, which apparantly was meddling:

The 11th Amendment came about as a direct result of a Supreme Court decision in Chisholm v Georgia (2 U.S. 419) in 1793 (see the Events Page for details). Feeling that the Supreme Court had overstepped its bounds, and fearing it would do so again unless prohibited in the Constitution. The Chisholm case was decided in 1793, just five years after the adoption of the Constitution. The Amendment was approved by Congress on March 4, 1794, and ratified on February 7, 1795. The Amendment limits the jurisdiction of the federal courts to automatically hear cases brought against a state by the citizens of another state. Later interpretations have expanded this to include citizens of the state being sued, as well.

Reference

[brianmelendez]

*Originally posted by Blalron *
**I file suit in federal court to get my money, but the case gets thrown out on 11th amendment grounds.

How would that be fair? **

It would be “fair” in the same way as any other suit that you can’t bring in federal court is “fair”: you can still sue in state court. You may have a right to your money, but you don’t have a right to a federal forum for your claim. The federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. The state courts are courts of general jurisdiction, and can hear whatever claims the federal court lacks jurisdiction over. (Yes, I realize that certain state courts–such as small-claims courts and justice-of-the-peace courts–are also courts of limited jurisdiction, but each state has a court system in which there is a forum, somewhere in the system, for every claim to which the state’s jurisdiction extends under due process.)