state immunity question still up for grabs....any1?
apparently the state is not a person for actions brought under the civil rights act of 1871 and enjoy immunity. However, why can't a state be sued under 42 usc 1983 if all the relief you are seeking against THE STATE is prospective relief? Wouldn't the Supreme Court's interpretation of the 11th amendment be incorrect or at least inconsistent with previous opinions of the court regarding prospective relief in comparison to retroactive relief? below is the court's opinion on this:
The district court held that a § 1983 action against the OAPA is improper regardless of the nature of the relief sought because the state and its agencies are not 'persons' within the meaning of that statute (citing Alabama v. Pugh, 438 U.S. 781, 57 L. Ed. 2d 1114, 98 S. Ct. 3057 (1978)). Knecht argues that this is a suit for "prospective" relief, as opposed to "retroactive" relief, and as such it is not barred pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment. In [*16] this context, Knecht argues that the Supreme Court's holding in Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 663, 39 L. Ed. 2d 662, 94 S. Ct. 1347 (1974), "is an incorrect interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment. . . . and shouldn't apply to this case." We do not accept Knecht's suggestion that we reject Supreme Court precedent. We acknowledge that this issue has been preserved for appeal.
***The court didn't even fully address the issue and I never brought an appeal of the issue (because it was moot by that time)but what are your thoughts on states immunity when seeking prospective relief?
- Anonymous9 years agoFavorite Answer
If you don't agree with a court try asking a higher court to overrule the lower court
Any question about suing under one section but not other section(s) of law is for courts to decide not anonymous people on an internet forum
- Anonymous9 years ago
you need a lawyer to answer this.