Eleventh Amendment: Suits against states

The Eleventh Amendment overruled a 1793 Supreme Court decision that let a citizen of another state sue Georgia in federal court. Courts have since read it as part of a broader rule of state sovereign immunity. The key practical point for Williams residents: that immunity belongs to the state, not to cities or counties.

The text

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.

Source: National Archives transcription Verified1

History

In Chisholm v. Georgia (1793), the Court let a South Carolina executor sue Georgia for a debt (Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793)) Verified2. States reacted quickly; Congress proposed the amendment the next year Verified1. The Archives notes that "Article III, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 11" Verified1.

How courts read it

• Own citizens too. The text covers suits by citizens of other states and foreign countries. Hans v. Louisiana (1890) acknowledged "the amendment does so read" but held a state also can't be sued by its own citizens in federal court (Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890)) Verified3.
• State courts too. Congress can't subject nonconsenting states "to private suits for damages in state courts" under its Article I powers (Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706 (1999)) Verified4.
• Suits against officials. An official enforcing an unconstitutional law "is in that case stripped of his official or representative character," so a federal court can order the official to stop (Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908)) Verified5.
• §1983. "A State is not a 'person'" under §1983 (Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989)) Verified6, so a damages suit under that statute can't name the State of California.

Cities and counties

Local governments don't share this immunity. In 1890 the Court rejected a county's argument that "because the county is an integral part of the state, it could not, under the eleventh amendment ... be sued": "The eleventh amendment limits the jurisdiction only as to suits against a state" (Lincoln County v. Luning, 133 U.S. 529 (1890)) Verified7. A local school board "is more like a county or city than it is an arm of the State" and "is not immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment" (Mt. Healthy City School Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (1977)) Verified8. And cities are "persons" who can be sued under §1983 when an official policy causes a violation (Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978)) Verified9.

How it reaches Williams

It doesn't protect Williams. A resident can sue the City of Williams in federal court under §1983 for a constitutional violation caused by city policy Verified7,9. State-law claims against a California city are governed by the Government Claims Act's filing rules (see below).

In Williams

The Eleventh Amendment protects the State of California. It doesn't protect the City of Williams Verified7. Two practical points follow.

• Federal court. If a Williams city policy violates your federal constitutional rights, the city itself can be sued under §1983, but only for harm caused by "official municipal policy" (see the course overview) Verified10.
• State-law claims have short deadlines. Before suing a public entity for money on most state-law claims, you first present a written claim. For "death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops," the claim is due "not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action"; most other claims are due "not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action" (Gov. Code §911.2) Verified11. If the entity sends written notice rejecting the claim, a lawsuit generally must be filed "not later than six months after the date such notice is personally delivered or deposited in the mail" (Gov. Code §945.6) Verified12.

Our reading: those deadlines have exceptions and details this page doesn't cover, and missing one can end a claim. If you think you have a claim against the city, talk to a licensed California attorney early. This site isn't legal advice.

Common misconceptions

• "You can't sue the government." You can't usually sue the state for damages in federal court. Cities are different Verified7.
• "The text only covers out-of-state plaintiffs." True of the text; Hans extended the rule Verified3.

Check yourself

Pick an answer for each question. You will see right away if it is right, and why.