Difference between revisions of "42 U.S.C. § 1983"

From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 21: Line 21:
  
  
 +
  
 
'''Waiver'''
 
'''Waiver'''
 +
Also, in Lapides v. Board of Regents of Univ. System of Georgia <reg>Lapides v. Board of Regents of Univ. System of Ga., 535 U.S. 613 (2002)</ref>, the Supreme Court concluded  that the state could voluntarily waive sovereign immunity by utilizing a federal removal procedure.
  
Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445 (1976)
+
'''Abbrogation'''
 
+
Using its powers under Article 5 of the 14th Amendment, Congress may abbrogate a state's sovereign immunity.<ref>Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445 (1976)</ref>
In Chisholm v. Georgia <ref>Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793)</ref>, the U.S. Supreme Court first permitted a lawsuit by an out of state resident against a state. Outraged by this usurpation of the common law tradition of sovereign immunity,
 
The Supreme Court, however, has circumvented the 11th Amendment in three ways:
 
#Allowing suits against state officers
 
#Permitting states to waive their 11th Amendment immunity
 
 
  
 
==Suits Against Federal Officers==
 
==Suits Against Federal Officers==

Revision as of 13:14, 10 August 2010

  1. Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793)
  2. Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890)
  3. Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908)
  4. Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445 (1976)