Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution

United States of America

This article is part of the series:
United States Constitution

Original text of the Constitution

Preamble

Articles of the Constitution
I ∙ II ∙ III ∙ IV ∙ V ∙ VI ∙ VII

Bill of Rights
I ∙ II ∙ III ∙ IV ∙ V
VI ∙ VII ∙ VIII ∙ IX ∙ X

Subsequent Amendments
XI ∙ XII ∙ XIII ∙ XIV ∙ XV
XVI ∙ XVII ∙ XVIII ∙ XIX ∙ XX
XXI ∙ XXII ∙ XXIII ∙ XXIV ∙ XXV
XXVI ∙ XXVII

Other countries · Law Portal
view • talk •

Summary

The Amendment was adopted following the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793). In Chisholm, the Court ruled that federal courts had the authority to hear cases in law and equity against states by private citizens, and that states did not enjoy sovereign immunity from suits made by citizens of other states. Thus, the Amendment clarified Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, which gave diversity jurisdiction to the judiciary to hear cases "between a state and citizens of another state."

Although the Amendment's text does not explicitly include suits brought by a citizen against his own state, the Supreme Court held, in Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890), that the Amendment reflects a broader principle of sovereign immunity. As Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for a five Justice majority, stated in Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706 (1999):

“

[S]overeign immunity derives not from the Eleventh Amendment but from the structure of the original Constitution itself....Nor can we conclude that the specific Article I powers delegated to Congress necessarily include, by virtue of the Necessary and Proper Clause or otherwise, the incidental authority to subject the States to private suits as a means of achieving objectives otherwise within the scope of the enumerated powers.^[1]

”

Writing for four dissenting Justices in Alden, Justice David Souter said the states surrendered their sovereign immunity when they ratified the Constitution. The dissenters read the Amendment's text as reflecting only a narrow form of sovereign immunity, limiting diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts, and the states are not insulated from suits by individuals by either the Eleventh Amendment in particular, or the Constitution in general.^[2]

Although, the Eleventh Amendment immunizes non-consenting states from suit for money damages or equitable relief, federal courts may enjoin state officials from violating federal law under Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908). Furthermore, in Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445 (1976), the Supreme Court held that the Congress, under its enforcement power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, may abrogate state immunity from suit. Also, in Central Virginia Community College v. Katz 546 U.S. 356 (2006), the Court held that the Congress could do the same regarding bankruptcy cases by way of Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution.

Proposal and ratification

The Congress proposed the Eleventh Amendment on March 4, 1794.^[3] The following states ratified the amendment:

New York (March 27, 1794)

Rhode Island (March 31, 1794)

Connecticut (May 8, 1794)

New Hampshire (June 16, 1794)

Massachusetts (June 26, 1794)

Vermont (November 9, 1794)

Virginia (November 18, 1794)

Georgia (November 29, 1794)

Kentucky (December 7, 1794)

Maryland (December 26, 1794)