But there is no Eleventh Amendment immunity in state court to be abrogated by section 5 of the 14thA. See, e.g., Dellmuth v. Muth, 491 U.S. 223, 229, n. 2, (1989) ("[A]n unconsenting State is immune from liability for damages in a suit _brought in federal court_ by one of its own citizens.) (emphasis added). .
Or: "In Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1(1890), the Court held that, despite the limited terms of the Eleventh Amendment, a federal court could not entertain a suit brought by a citizen against his own State. . . . [F]ederal jurisdiction over suits against unconsenting States "was not contemplated by the Constitution when establishing the judicial power of the United States." In short the principle of sovereign immunity is a constitutional limitation on the federal judicial power established in > Art. III." Pennhurt State School & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 96-97 (1984).
The state court suits should be OK. --jks
>From: "Nathan Newman" <nathan at newman.org>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>Subject: Re: ADA suits against states struck down- what's next?
>Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:03:14 -0500
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Justin Schwartz" <jkschw at hotmail.com>
>
>
> >No. The 11th amendment stuff just blocks lawsuits IN FEDERAL COURT. It's
>a
> >jurisdictional issue, and the 11th amendment doesn't speak to the
> >jurisdiction of the state courts. So the states can be sued under the ADA
> >FOR DAMAGES in state court. --jks
>
>I don't think so, Justin, unless the state government chooses to waive
>immunity. I don't think you can sue under federal law when there is no
>right of action to sue in the federal courts. Federalism is pretty
>bizarre,
>but I don't think its that bizarre.
>
>I think you are looking for optimistic loopholes where there are none. And
>I
>agree with Marta that the march of cases is that no damages will be won
>against states in any form, although injunctive relief will hopefully
>remain. Unless the Supreme Court follows up on its statement that the ADA
>was not justified by the evidence to rule the whole law unconstitutional as
>outside the Congress's enumerated powers.
>
>-- Nathan Newman
>
>
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com