Loading…

Fighting the Words of the Eleventh Amendment

The eleventh amendment precludes federal jurisdiction in suits brought against a state by citizens of another state or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state. While the language of the amendment appears unambiguous, courts have construed it to preclude suits brought by foreign governments agai...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Harvard law review 1989-04, Vol.102 (6), p.1342-1371
Main Author: Marshall, Lawrence C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The eleventh amendment precludes federal jurisdiction in suits brought against a state by citizens of another state or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state. While the language of the amendment appears unambiguous, courts have construed it to preclude suits brought by foreign governments against nonconsenting states and citizens of a state from suing their own state in federal court. Critics of the Supreme Court's treatment of the eleventh amendment have advanced 2 alternative readings: the diversity theory and the congressional abrogation theory. Like the Supreme Court's interpretation of the amendment in Hans versus Louisiana, the diversity and the congressional abrogation theory rely on evidence and speculation about the original intent and purposes of the amendment's framers and ratifiers. The framers of the constitution were concerned with obligations under the peace treaty, foreign suits, and preserving the peace. An examination of the amendment's historical background indicates that the precise and determinate language of the amendment is evidence of the framers' intent.
ISSN:0017-811X
2161-976X
DOI:10.2307/1341298