|
|
|
Eleventh
Amendment
Proposed
on March 4, 1794. Ratified on February 7, 1795.
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.
Order
of State Ratification
| New
York |
Mar
27, 1794 |
Rhode
Island |
Mar
31, 1794 |
| Connecticut |
May
8, 1794 |
New
Hampshire |
Jun
16, 1794 |
| Massachusetts |
Jun
26, 1794 |
Vermont |
Nov
9, 1794 |
| Virginia |
Nov
18, 1794 |
Georgia |
Nov
29, 1794 |
| Kentucky |
Dec
7, 1794 |
Maryland |
Dec
26, 1794 |
| Delaware |
Jan
23, 1795 |
North
Carolina |
Feb
7, 1795 |
| South
Carolina |
Dec
4, 1797 |
|
|
| Denotes
last state required for ratification. |
|
|
Court
Cases |
|
|
Wisconsin
Department of Corrections v. Schacht
Seminole
Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 116 S. Ct. 1114
Chisholm
v. State of Ga., 2 U.S. 419
Larson
v. Domestic and Foreign Commerce Corporation , 337 U.S. 682
Governor
of Georgia v. Madrazo, 26 U.S. 110
United
States v. Peters, 9 U.S. 115
Ex
Parte Madrazzo, 32 U.S. 627
Cohens
v. Com. Of Virginia, 19 U.S. 264
|
|
|
References
and Articles |
|
|
Bankruptcy
Code Sections 106(a) and (b) Unconstitutional Under Eleventh Amendment
Does
the Eleventh Amendment Bar Age Discrimination Claims Against State Instrumentalities?
Suit
Against State Bar Dismissed Based on Eleventh
Amendment and Younger Abstention
Labor:
No Claim Against United States Under Family and
Medical Leave Act Because of Sovereign Immunity
The
ADEA and the Eleventh Amendment By Laurie A. McCann
Eleventh
Amendment Immunity
The
Art of Shooting Oneself in the Foot: The Conservative
Judges "Do" the Eleventh Amendment
State
Immunity
The
Nature of the States' Immunity
Suits
Against States
Suits
Against State Officials
The
Evolving Eleventh Amendment: The Impact of Recent
Supreme Court Cases on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities
U.S.
Supreme Court Backtracks on Eleventh Amendment Holding
Exclusive
Jurisdiction and the Eleventh Amendment: Recognizing
the Assumption of State Court Availability in the
Clear Statement Compromise |
|
|
