The eleventh amendment: Unfinished business

Notre Dame Law Review

Volumn 75, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 843-858

  Fletcher, William A ^a,b  

^a U States Ct Appeals Ninth Circuit ^*  (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 23044517940     PISSN: 07453515     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (100)

1. See CLYDE EDWARD JACOBS, THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT AND SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY (1972).
2. See John E. Nowak, The Scope of Congressional Power to Create Causes of Action Against State Governments and the History of the Eleventh and Fourteenth Amendments, 75 COLUM. L. REV. 1413 (1975).
3. See Laurence H. Tribe, Intergovernmental Immunities in Litigation, Taxation and Regulation: Separation of Powers Issues in Controversies About Federalism, 89 HARV. L. REV. 682 (1976).
4. See Martha Field, The Eleventh Amendment and Other Sovereign Immunity Doctrines: Part One, 126 U. PA. L. REV. 515 (1978) [hereinafter Field, Part One] ; Martha Field, The Eleventh Amendment and Other Sovereign Immunity Doctrines: Congressional Imposition of Suit upon the States, 126 U. PA. L. REV. 1203 (1978) [hereinafter Field, Congressional Imposition].
5. See Martha Field, The Eleventh Amendment and Other Sovereign Immunity Doctrines: Part One, 126 U. PA. L. REV. 515 (1978) [hereinafter Field, Part One] ; Martha Field, The Eleventh Amendment and Other Sovereign Immunity Doctrines: Congressional Imposition of Suit upon the States, 126 U. PA. L. REV. 1203 (1978) [hereinafter Field, Congressional Imposition].
6. See Martha Field, The Eleventh Amendment and Other Sovereign Immunity Doctrines: Part One, 126 U. PA. L. REV. 515 (1978) [hereinafter Field, Part One] ; Martha Field, The Eleventh Amendment and Other Sovereign Immunity Doctrines: Congressional Imposition of Suit upon the States, 126 U. PA. L. REV. 1203 (1978) [hereinafter Field, Congressional Imposition].
7. See Martha Field, The Eleventh Amendment and Other Sovereign Immunity Doctrines: Part One, 126 U. PA. L. REV. 515 (1978) [hereinafter Field, Part One] ; Martha Field, The Eleventh Amendment and Other Sovereign Immunity Doctrines: Congressional Imposition of Suit upon the States, 126 U. PA. L. REV. 1203 (1978) [hereinafter Field, Congressional Imposition].
8. See Employees of the Dep't of Pub. Health & Welfare v. Department of Pub. Health & Welfare, 411 U.S. 279, 298 (1973) (Brennan, J., dissenting).
9. 415 U.S. 651 (1974).
10. 427 U.S. 445 (1976).
11. 465 U.S. 89 (1984).
12. 209 U.S. 123 (1908).
13. See Pennhurst State Sch., 465 U.S. at 106.
14. 473 U.S. 234 (1985).
15. See id. at 247 (Brennan, J., dissenting).
16. 483 U.S. 468 (1987).
17. 45 U.S.C. §§ 51-60 (1994).
18. 491 U.S. 1 (1989).
19. 502 U.S. 197 (1991).
20. 501 U.S. 775 (1991).
21. 517 U.S. 44 (1996).
22. 521 U.S. 261 (1997).
23. 119 S. Ct. 2199 (1999).
24. 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 (h), 296 (1994).
25. 119 S. Ct. 2219 (1999).
26. Pub. L. No. 102-542, 106 Stat. 3567 (1992) (codified as amended in scattered sections of 15 U.S.C.).
27. 119 S. Ct. 2240 (1999).
28. Carlos Manuel Vázquez, What Is Eleventh Amendment Immunity?, 106 YALE L.J. 1283 (1997).
29. 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-19 (1994 & Supp. III 1997).
30. 120 S. Ct. 631 (2000).
31. 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-34 (1994 & Supp. III 1997).
32. 119 S. Ct. 2391 (1999) (granting cert, from United States ex rel Stevens v. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, 162 F.3d 195 (2d Cir. 1998)).
33. 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
34. HENRY J. FRIENDLY, FEDERAL JURISDICTION: A GENERAL VIEW 3 n.7 (1973).
35. Sometimes the affirmative injunctions are straightforward orders to do specific things in accordance with federal law in the future. See, e.g., Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 402 U.S. 1 (1971). Many lower court prison reform cases also support this proposition. Occasionally, they are orders to act affirmatively in the future to cure constitutional violations that occurred in the past. See, e.g., Milliken v. Bradley, 433 U.S. 267 (1977).
36. 45 U.S.C. §§ 51-60 (1994). For cases involving this statute, see Hilton v. South Carolina Public Railway Commission, 502 U.S. 197 (1991), Welch v. Texas Department of Highways & Public Transportation, 483 U.S. 469 (1987), Parden v. Terminal Railway, 377 U.S. 184 (1964), and United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100 (1941).
37. 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-19 (1994). For cases involving this statute, see Alden v. Maine, 119 S. Ct. 2240 (1999), Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, 469 U.S. 528 (1985), and National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S. 833 (1976).
38. 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-75 (1994 & Supp. III 1997). See Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co., 491 U.S. 1 (1989), for a case involving this statute.
39. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381-85 (1994 & Supp. III 1997). See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651 (1974), for a case involving this statute.
40. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
41. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
42. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
43. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
44. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
45. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
46. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
47. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
48. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
49. For an adumbration of the diversity explanation, see Field, Part One, supra note 4, and Field, Congressional Imposition, supra note 4. For the first two fully argued versions of the diversity explanation, see William A. Fletcher, A Historical Interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Narrow Construction of an Affirmative Grant of Jurisdiction Rather Than a Prohibition Against Jurisdiction, 35 STAN. L. REV. 1033 (1983) [hereinafter Fletcher, Historical Interpretation], and John J. Gibbons, The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity: A Reinterpretation, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1889 (1983), and see also Akhil Reed Amar, Of Sovereignty and Federalism, 96 YALE L.J. 1425 (1987), William A. Fletcher, The Diversity Explanation of the Eleventh Amendment: A Reply to Critics, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1261 (1989), Vicki C. Jackson, The Supreme Court, the Eleventh Amendment, and State Sovereign Immunity, 98 YALE L.J. 1 (1988), James E. Pfander, History and State Suability: An "Explanatory" Account of the Eleventh Amendment, 83 CORNELL L. REV. 1269 (1998), and Suzanna Sherry, The Eleventh Amendment and Stare Decisis: Overruling Hans v. Louisiana, 57 U. CHI. L. REV. 1260 (1990).
50. See Lawrence C. Marshall, Fighting the Words of the Eleventh Amendment, 102 HARV. L. REV. 1342 (1989); William P. Marshall, The Diversity Theory of the Eleventh Amendment: A Critical Evaluation, 102 HARV. L. REV. 1372 (1989); Calvin R. Massey, State Sovereignty and the Tenth and Eleventh Amendments, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 61 (1989).
51. See Lawrence C. Marshall, Fighting the Words of the Eleventh Amendment, 102 HARV. L. REV. 1342 (1989); William P. Marshall, The Diversity Theory of the Eleventh Amendment: A Critical Evaluation, 102 HARV. L. REV. 1372 (1989); Calvin R. Massey, State Sovereignty and the Tenth and Eleventh Amendments, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 61 (1989).
52. See Lawrence C. Marshall, Fighting the Words of the Eleventh Amendment, 102 HARV. L. REV. 1342 (1989); William P. Marshall, The Diversity Theory of the Eleventh Amendment: A Critical Evaluation, 102 HARV. L. REV. 1372 (1989); Calvin R. Massey, State Sovereignty and the Tenth and Eleventh Amendments, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 61 (1989).
53. See Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890).
54. See Blatchford v. Native Village, 501 U.S. 775 (1991).
55. See Monaco v. Mississippi, 292 U.S. 313 (1934).
56. See Ex parte New York, 256 U.S. 490 (1921). But see California v. Deep Sea Research, Inc., 523 U.S. 491 (1998).
57. See Alden v. Maine, 119 S. Ct. 2240, 2266 (1999).
58. Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 677-78 (1974).
59. 133 U.S. 529 (1890).
60. See Edelman, 415 U.S. at 664.
61. Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 172 (1961); see also Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 165-176 (1985); Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 243 (1974).
62. 427 U.S. 445, 456 (1976).
63. It appears that Congress may also abrogate the 11th Amendment when legilating under Section 2 of the 15th Amendment. See City of Rome v. United States, 446 U.S. 156 (1980).
64. 323 U.S. 459 (1945).
65. See id. at 467. Justice Kennedy has recently raised this issue, arguing in a concurrence in Wisconsin Department of Corrections v. Schacht, 524 U.S. 381, 393 (1998), that a state may waive the 11th Amendment by removing a suit from state to federal court. Indeed, Justice Kennedy would actually go further than Ford Motor Co. and would hold that an attorney can waive the 11th Amendment by removing to federal court (or, by extension, by failing to assert the 11th Amendment in a suit already in federal court), irrespective of whether the attorney was specifically authorized under state law to waive the Amendment. See id. at 397 (Kennedy, J., concurring); see also Hill v. Blind Indus., 179 F.3d 754 (9th Cir. 1999) (adopung Justice Kennedy's approach).
66. 133 U.S. 529 (1890).
67. See Fletcher, Historical Interpretation, supra note 37, at 1101-07.
68. See John C. Jeffries, In Praise of the Eleventh Amendment and Section 1983, 84 VA. L. REV. 47 (1998).
69. See Ann Woolhandler, Old Property, New Property and Sovereign Immunity, 75 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 919 (2000).
70. See Jeffries, supra note 54, at 50 n.16.
71. See City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989); Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622 (1980).
72. See City of Los Angeles v. Heller, 475 U.S. 796 (1986) (finding no basis for damages liability against the employing municipality where there has been no constitutional violation by an individual officer).
73. 123 U.S. 443 (1887).
74. See Louis L. Jaffe, Suits Against Governments and Officers: Sovereign Immunity, 77 HARV. L. REV. 1, 29 (1963).
75. See Seminole Tribe v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, 72-73 (1996) ("The Eleventh Amendment restricts the judicial power under Article III, and Article I cannot be used to circumvent the constitutional limitations placed upon federal jurisdiction.").
76. See Vicki C. Jackson, Seminole Tribe, the Eleventh Amendment, and the Potential Evisceration of Ex Parte Young, 72 N.Y.U. L. REV. 495 (1997); see also Daniel J. Meltzer, The Seminole Decision and Sovereign Immunity, 1996 SUP. CT. REV. 1.
77. See Vicki C. Jackson, Seminole Tribe, the Eleventh Amendment, and the Potential Evisceration of Ex Parte Young, 72 N.Y.U. L. REV. 495 (1997); see also Daniel J. Meltzer, The Seminole Decision and Sovereign Immunity, 1996 SUP. CT. REV. 1.
78. 377 U.S. 184 (1964).
79. 502 U.S. 197 (1991).
80. 45 U.S.C. §§ 51-60 (1994).
81. 119 S. Ct. 2240, 2246 (1999).
82. 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-19 (1994 & Supp. III 1997).
83. 491 U.S. 1, 5 (1989).
84. 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-75 (1994 & Supp. III 1997).
85. 119 S. Ct. 2199, 2202-03 (1999).
86. 35 U.S.C. § 271, 296 (1994 & Supp. III 1997).
87. 119 S. Ct. 2219, 2222 (1999).
88. 15 U.S.C. § 1051-1127 (1994 & Supp. IV 1998).
89. 426 U.S. 833
90. 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(2) (1994).
91. See Vicki C. Jackson, Seductions of Coherence, State Sovereign Immunity and Constitutional Compromise, 31 RUTGERS. L.J. (forthcoming 2000).
92. See, e.g., South-Central Timber Dev. v. Wunnicke, 467 U.S. 82 (1984); Reeves, Inc. v. Stake, 447 U.S. 429 (1980).
93. 120 S. Ct. 666, 672 (2000) ("[T]he DPPA does not require the States in their sovereign capacity to regulate their own citizens. The DPPA regulates the States as the owners of databases. . . . The DPPA regulates the universe of entities that participate as suppliers to the market for motor vehicle information - the States as initial suppliers of the information in interstate commerce and private resellers or redisclosers of that information in commerce.").
94. See Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents, 120 S. Ct. 631 (2000).
95. see John C. Jeffries, The Right-Remedy Gap in Constitutional Law, 109 YALE L.J. 87 (1999).
96. See Wilson v. Layne, 119 S. Ct. 1692, 1699 (1999); Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982).
97. See Pfander, supra note 37.
98. Alden v. Maine, 119 S.Ct. 2240, 2246 (1999).
99. 292 U.S. 313, 322 (1934).
100. Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1, 15 (1890).