quern
jordan
argued
november
decided
march
edelman
jordan
held
retroactive
welfare
benefits
awarded
federal
district
plaintiff
class
reason
wrongful
denial
benefits
illinois
officials
prior
entry
order
determining
wrongfulness
actions
violated
eleventh
amendment
action
federal
remedial
power
consistent
eleventh
amendment
necessarily
limited
prospective
injunctive
relief
may
include
retroactive
award
requires
payment
funds
state
treasury
edelman
supra
remand
district
ordered
state
officials
send
member
plaintiff
class
notice
informing
denied
public
assistance
entitled
together
notice
appeal
recipient
request
hearing
denial
benefits
appeals
reversed
ground
proposed
form
notice
barred
eleventh
amendment
stated
remand
district
order
state
officials
send
mere
explanatory
notice
applicants
advising
state
administrative
procedure
available
desire
state
determine
whether
may
eligible
past
benefits
returnable
notice
appeal
also
provided
held
neither
monell
new
york
city
dept
social
services
legislative
history
cited
decision
eleventh
amendment
cases
subsequent
edelman
cast
doubt
edelman
holding
abrogate
eleventh
amendment
immunity
section
explicitly
clear
language
indicate
face
intent
sweep
away
immunity
history
focuses
directly
question
state
liability
shows
congress
considered
firmly
decided
abrogate
eleventh
amendment
immunity
hutto
finney
distinguished
reaffirmance
edelman
case
render
meaningless
insofar
concerned
pp
modified
notice
contemplated
appeals
constitutes
permissible
prospective
relief
retroactive
award
requires
payment
funds
state
treasury
notice
effect
simply
informs
plaintiff
class
members
existing
administrative
procedures
may
receive
determination
eligibility
past
benefits
federal
suit
end
federal
provide
relief
whether
recipient
notice
decides
take
advantage
available
procedures
left
completely
discretion
particular
class
member
federal
playing
role
decision
whether
class
member
receive
retroactive
benefits
rests
entirely
state
agencies
courts
legislature
federal
pp
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
burger
stewart
white
blackmun
powell
stevens
joined
brennan
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
parts
ii
iii
marshall
joined
post
marshall
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
post
william
wenzel
iii
special
assistant
attorney
general
illinois
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
william
scott
attorney
general
sheldon
roodman
argued
cause
respondent
brief
james
weill
theodore
sendak
attorney
general
william
mundy
deputy
attorney
general
donald
bogard
filed
brief
state
indiana
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
justice
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
case
sequel
edelman
jordan
decided
five
terms
ago
edelman
held
retroactive
welfare
benefits
awarded
federal
district
plaintiffs
reason
wrongful
denial
benefits
state
officials
prior
entry
order
determining
wrongfulness
actions
violated
eleventh
amendment
issue
us
whether
federal
may
consistent
eleventh
amendment
order
state
officials
send
mere
explanatory
notice
members
plaintiff
class
advising
state
administrative
procedures
available
may
receive
determination
whether
entitled
past
welfare
benefits
granted
certiorari
resolve
apparent
conflict
decision
appeals
seventh
circuit
case
appeals
third
circuit
fanty
commonwealth
pennsylvania
dept
public
welfare
believe
case
comes
us
involves
little
unbroken
ground
area
affirm
judgment
seventh
circuit
following
remand
edelman
district
northern
district
illinois
upon
motion
plaintiff
ordered
state
officials
send
member
plaintiff
class
notice
informing
recipient
ou
denied
public
assistance
entitled
amount
jordan
trainor
supp
enclosed
required
mailing
notice
appeal
signed
returned
illinois
department
public
aid
requested
hearing
denial
benefits
notice
stated
department
illegally
delayed
processing
aabd
application
consequence
denied
benefits
entitled
appeals
en
banc
found
proposed
form
notice
barred
eleventh
amendment
since
least
purported
decide
illinois
public
funds
used
satisfy
claims
plaintiff
class
members
without
consent
state
appropriate
officials
jordan
trainor
reversed
district
order
reason
stated
remand
district
order
state
officials
send
mere
explanatory
notice
applicants
advising
state
administrative
procedure
available
desire
state
determine
whether
may
eligible
past
benefits
simple
returnable
notice
appeal
form
also
provided
ibid
view
notice
violate
distinction
set
forth
edelman
prospective
relief
permitted
eleventh
amendment
retrospective
relief
form
notice
envisage
create
liability
state
whether
liability
might
result
matter
state
determination
federal
federal
judgment
state
created
notice
labeled
equitable
restitution
considered
award
damages
state
defendant
makes
issue
incidental
administrative
expense
connected
preparation
mailing
notice
suggested
record
notice
included
regular
monthly
mailing
necessary
information
comes
computer
indication
administrative
expense
substantial
edelman
reaffirmed
rule
evolved
earlier
cases
suit
federal
private
parties
seeking
impose
liability
must
paid
public
funds
state
treasury
barred
eleventh
amendment
see
kennecott
copper
state
tax
ford
motor
department
treasury
great
northern
life
ins
read
rejected
notion
simply
lower
grant
retroactive
benefits
styled
equitable
restitution
permissible
eleventh
amendment
also
pointed
landmark
decision
ex
parte
young
federal
consistent
eleventh
amendment
may
enjoin
state
officials
conform
future
conduct
requirements
federal
law
even
though
injunction
may
ancillary
effect
state
treasury
see
milliken
bradley
scheuer
rhodes
distinction
relief
permissible
doctrine
ex
parte
young
found
barred
edelman
difference
prospective
relief
one
hand
retrospective
relief
petitioner
state
official
devotes
significant
part
brief
attack
proposed
notice
district
required
state
officials
send
however
decision
appeals
district
review
behest
petitioner
petitioner
insists
tilting
windmills
attacking
district
decision
respondent
suggests
decision
edelman
eviscerated
later
decisions
monell
new
york
city
dept
social
services
brief
respondent
see
also
aldridge
turlington
nd
see
skehan
board
trustees
bloomsburg
state
college
noted
held
edelman
action
federal
remedial
power
consistent
eleventh
amendment
necessarily
limited
prospective
injunctive
relief
ex
parte
young
supra
may
include
retroactive
award
requires
payment
funds
state
treasury
ford
motor
department
treasury
supra
disagree
respondent
suggestion
holding
monell
limited
local
government
units
considered
part
state
eleventh
amendment
purposes
eleventh
amendment
decisions
subsequent
edelman
monell
cast
doubt
holding
edelman
see
alabama
pugh
hutto
finney
milliken
bradley
supra
fitzpatrick
bitzer
scheuer
rhodes
supra
separate
opinions
hutto
finney
supra
debated
continuing
soundness
edelman
decision
monell
doubt
score
largely
dispelled
alabama
pugh
supra
decided
days
hutto
pugh
held
three
dissents
state
alabama
joined
defendant
without
violating
eleventh
amendment
even
though
complaint
based
claim
violation
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
similar
made
hutto
said
doubt
however
suit
state
board
corrections
barred
eleventh
amendment
unless
alabama
consented
filing
suit
edelman
jordan
ford
motor
department
treasury
worcester
county
trust
riley
justice
brennan
opinion
concurring
judgment
argues
holding
edelman
abrogate
eleventh
amendment
immunity
likely
incorrect
post
reach
conclusion
relies
assum
ptions
drawn
fourteenth
amendment
post
occasional
remarks
found
legislative
history
contains
little
debate
civil
rights
act
stat
precursor
post
reference
bodies
politic
act
stat
dictionary
act
post
finally
general
language
post
unlike
brother
brennan
simply
unwilling
believe
basis
slender
evidence
congress
intended
general
language
override
traditional
sovereign
immunity
therefore
conclude
neither
reasoning
monell
eleventh
amendment
cases
subsequent
edelman
additional
legislative
history
arguments
set
forth
justice
brennan
opinion
justify
conclusion
different
reached
edelman
question
supporters
opponents
civil
rights
act
believed
act
ceded
federal
government
many
important
powers
previously
considered
within
exclusive
province
individual
many
remarks
legislative
history
act
quoted
justice
brennan
opinion
amply
demonstrate
point
post
see
also
monroe
pape
neither
logic
circumstances
surrounding
adoption
fourteenth
amendment
legislative
history
act
compels
even
warrants
leap
proposition
conclusion
congress
intended
general
language
act
overturn
constitutionally
guaranteed
immunity
several
tenney
brandhove
rejected
similar
attempt
interpret
word
person
withdrawal
historic
immunity
state
legislators
words
bear
repeating
congress
general
language
statute
mean
overturn
tradition
legislative
freedom
achieved
england
civil
war
carefully
preserved
formation
state
national
governments
mean
subject
legislators
civil
liability
acts
done
within
sphere
legislative
activity
limits
statute
title
spelled
debate
believe
congress
staunch
advocate
legislative
freedom
impinge
tradition
well
grounded
history
reason
covert
inclusion
general
language
us
cases
consistently
required
clearer
showing
congressional
purpose
abrogate
eleventh
amendment
immunity
brother
brennan
able
marshal
employees
missouri
public
health
concluded
congress
lift
sovereign
immunity
enacting
fair
labor
standards
act
absence
indication
clear
language
constitutional
immunity
swept
away
easy
infer
congress
legislating
pursuant
commerce
clause
grown
vast
proportions
applications
desired
silently
deprive
immunity
long
enjoyed
another
part
constitution
fitzpatrick
bitzer
found
present
title
vii
civil
rights
act
et
threshold
fact
congressional
authorization
sue
state
employer
statute
made
explicit
reference
availability
private
action
state
local
governments
event
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
attorney
general
failed
bring
suit
effect
conciliation
agreement
see
equal
opportunity
employment
act
stat
pp
pp
conf
pp
conf
pp
finally
hutto
finney
decided
last
term
held
enacting
civil
rights
attorney
fees
awards
act
congress
intended
override
eleventh
amendment
immunity
authorize
fee
awards
payable
officials
sued
official
capacities
although
statutory
language
hutto
separately
impose
liability
many
words
statute
history
focusing
directly
question
state
liability
congress
considered
firmly
rejected
suggestion
immune
fee
awards
also
noted
statute
rendered
meaningless
respect
act
impose
liability
attorney
fees
ibid
see
employees
missouri
public
health
supra
contrast
explicitly
clear
language
indicate
face
intent
sweep
away
immunity
history
focuses
directly
question
state
liability
shows
congress
considered
firmly
decided
abrogate
eleventh
amendment
immunity
reaffirmance
edelman
render
meaningless
insofar
concerned
see
ex
parte
young
turn
question
caused
disagreement
courts
appeals
modified
notice
contemplated
seventh
circuit
constitute
permissible
prospective
relief
retroactive
award
requires
payment
funds
state
treasury
think
relief
falls
ex
parte
young
side
eleventh
amendment
line
rather
edelman
side
petitioner
makes
issue
incidental
administrative
expense
connected
preparing
mailing
notice
instead
argues
giving
proposed
notice
lead
inexorably
payment
state
funds
retroactive
benefits
therefore
effect
amounts
monetary
award
chain
causation
petitioner
seeks
establish
means
unbroken
contains
numerous
missing
links
supplied
state
members
plaintiff
class
federal
notice
approved
appeals
simply
apprises
plaintiff
class
members
existence
whatever
administrative
procedures
may
already
available
state
law
may
receive
determination
eligibility
past
benefits
notice
appeal
told
virtually
identical
notice
sent
department
public
aid
every
case
denial
reduction
benefits
mere
sending
notice
trigger
state
administrative
machinery
whether
recipient
notice
decides
take
advantage
available
state
procedures
left
completely
discretion
particular
class
member
federal
plays
role
decision
whether
class
member
receive
retroactive
benefits
rests
entirely
state
agencies
courts
legislature
federal
notice
approved
appeals
unlike
ordered
district
properly
viewed
ancillary
prospective
relief
already
ordered
see
milliken
bradley
notice
effect
simply
informs
class
members
federal
suit
end
federal
provide
relief
existing
state
administrative
procedures
may
wish
pursue
petitioner
raises
objection
expense
preparing
sending
class
members
given
gathered
sitting
courtroom
jordan
trainor
judgment
appeals
therefore
affirmed
footnotes
fanty
plaintiff
class
alleged
manner
defendant
state
officials
collected
class
members
federal
benefits
reimbursement
amounts
granted
state
welfare
laws
violated
decision
philpott
essex
county
welfare
board
district
agreed
denied
retroactive
relief
state
basis
edelman
jordan
supra
require
defendant
state
officials
notify
plaintiff
class
members
philpott
legal
obligation
make
reimbursement
federal
disability
benefits
matter
state
law
may
cause
action
department
public
welfare
refund
prior
payments
appeals
three
separate
opinions
reversed
chief
judge
seitz
opinion
notice
relief
barred
eleventh
amendment
judge
garth
concurring
result
believed
eleventh
amendment
issue
borderline
voted
reverse
basis
case
controversy
judge
hunter
dissented
grounds
relevant
however
disagreed
chief
judge
seitz
eleventh
amendment
prohibited
notice
relief
class
action
qualifying
fed
rule
civ
proc
class
members
never
received
notice
complaint
original
lower
judgment
decision
effect
see
eisen
carlisle
jacquelin
fed
rule
civ
proc
rule
however
may
require
appropriate
notice
protection
members
class
otherwise
fair
conduct
action
prior
ordering
notice
district
requested
parties
submit
information
respect
number
persons
plaintiff
class
cost
notifying
amounts
involved
issues
affecting
equities
sending
notice
respondent
filed
response
request
state
officials
submitted
response
respondent
indicated
approximately
members
plaintiff
class
app
cost
identifying
class
members
stated
simply
cost
running
department
computer
period
necessary
cull
names
plaintiff
class
members
respondent
claimed
additional
cost
notifying
class
members
notice
included
one
regular
mailings
members
plaintiff
class
petitioner
disputed
respondent
allegations
either
panel
seventh
circuit
originally
reversed
district
order
requiring
notice
ground
eleventh
amendment
jurisdictional
bar
exercise
federal
judicial
power
concerning
past
action
inaction
state
respect
aid
aged
blind
disabled
program
jordan
trainor
reaching
decision
seventh
circuit
relied
part
summary
affirmance
grubb
sterrett
supp
nd
ind
aff
district
ordered
indiana
public
assistance
officials
send
plaintiff
class
members
notice
similar
one
issue
appeals
recognized
list
summary
affirmances
overruled
edelman
necessarily
intended
exhaustive
see
jordan
trainor
however
prefer
rest
affirmance
judgment
appeals
case
conclusion
consistent
edelman
stated
edelman
hat
portion
district
decree
petitioner
challenges
eleventh
amendment
grounds
goes
much
ex
parte
young
cases
followed
requires
payment
state
funds
necessary
consequence
compliance
future
substantive
determination
form
compensation
whose
applications
processed
slower
time
schedule
time
petitioner
obligation
conform
different
standard
virtual
certainty
paid
state
funds
pockets
individual
state
officials
defendants
action
measured
terms
monetary
loss
resulting
past
breach
legal
duty
part
defendant
state
officials
justice
brennan
opinion
concurring
judgment
edelman
jordan
supra
held
override
state
immunity
reason
later
stated
fitzpatrick
civil
rights
act
held
monroe
pape
exclude
cities
municipal
corporations
ambit
case
intended
include
parties
defendant
post
since
monell
overruled
monroe
holding
cities
municipal
corporations
persons
within
meaning
justice
brennan
opinion
argues
premise
edelman
undercut
post
fallacy
line
reasoning
aptly
demonstrated
last
term
justice
powell
concurring
opinion
hutto
stated
language
question
fitzpatrick
essential
holding
case
moreover
position
ignores
fact
edelman
rests
squarely
eleventh
amendment
immunity
without
adverting
terms
treatment
legislative
history
monroe
pape
fact
monroe
pape
even
cited
edelman
hutto
finney
three
separate
opinions
addition
two
opinions
expressed
view
misapplied
rule
laid
edelman
powell
concurring
dissenting
rehnquist
dissenting
justice
brennan
though
joining
opinion
wrote
separately
suggest
opinions
monell
fitzpatrick
bitzer
rendered
essential
premise
edelman
holding
longer
true
hutto
however
recognized
applied
edelman
distinction
retrospective
prospective
relief
brother
brennan
opinion
concurring
judgment
curiously
suggests
language
quoted
pugh
text
mean
face
says
briefs
case
filed
decision
monell
announced
post
parties
pugh
without
benefit
monell
major
legislative
history
post
members
labored
similar
disability
decision
pugh
handed
nearly
one
month
monell
days
hutto
separate
opinions
debated
precise
point
monell
hutto
harbored
doubts
continued
validity
edelman
conclusion
constitute
waiver
eleventh
amendment
immunity
inconceivable
taken
extraordinary
action
summarily
reversing
lower
basis
edelman
limited
debate
civil
rights
act
passed
without
amendment
monell
new
york
city
dept
social
services
sections
drew
debate
created
certain
federal
crimes
permitted
president
send
militia
state
widespread
ku
klux
klan
violence
authorized
suspension
writ
habeas
corpus
certain
circumstances
dictionary
act
intended
provide
general
rules
construction
statutes
cong
globe
remarks
poland
enacted
two
months
enactment
civil
rights
act
came
five
years
passage
civil
rights
act
stat
served
model
language
act
cong
globe
app
remarks
shellabarger
see
monroe
pape
post
justice
brennan
opinion
characterizes
conclusion
gratuitous
paten
dicta
post
think
gratuitous
useless
exercise
discretionary
jurisdiction
decide
two
conflicting
interpretations
edelman
jordan
correct
truth
believed
edelman
longer
valid
question
arise
blue
extensively
discussed
brother
brennan
concurrence
hutto
finney
last
term
therefore
fail
see
reaffirmance
edelman
characterized
dicta
example
act
attacked
attempt
strip
power
punish
proscribe
offenses
within
borders
cong
globe
remarks
rice
app
remarks
moore
app
remarks
blair
authority
decide
militia
called
territory
quell
domestic
disturbances
remarks
davis
app
remarks
mccormick
indeed
line
cases
relied
heavily
monell
surely
militate
conclusion
see
prigg
pennsylvania
pet
kentucky
dennison
collector
day
wall
brother
brennan
concurrence
judgment
today
relies
ex
parte
virginia
virginia
rives
cases
decided
nearly
decade
enactment
civil
rights
act
noted
monell
substantially
undercut
line
cases
purposes
enforcement
fourteenth
amendment
noted
monell
line
cases
reigning
constitutional
theory
day
civil
rights
act
debated
enacted
employees
found
word
history
statute
indicate
purpose
congress
make
possible
citizen
state
another
state
sue
state
federal
courts
also
added
interpretation
law
render
statute
inclusion
state
institutions
meaningless
hutto
unlike
fitzpatrick
employees
require
express
statutory
waiver
state
immunity
careful
emphasize
concerned
expenses
incurred
litigation
seeking
prospective
relief
cases
involved
retroactive
liability
prelitigation
conduct
also
noted
concerned
statute
imposed
enormous
fiscal
burdens
might
require
formal
indication
congress
intent
abrogate
eleventh
amendment
immunity
employees
fitzpatrick
extending
liability
obviously
place
enormous
fiscal
burdens
need
reach
question
whether
express
waiver
required
neither
language
statute
legislative
history
discloses
intent
overturn
eleventh
amendment
immunity
imposing
liability
directly
upon
arguments
justice
brennan
opinion
regarding
osborn
bank
wheat
similarly
unpersuasive
post
chief
justice
marshall
opinion
osborn
makes
clear
determining
whether
grant
relief
key
inquiry
whether
state
officer
fact
real
party
interest
whether
nominal
party
see
also
bank
planters
bank
georgia
wheat
chief
justice
marshall
emphasized
precise
point
four
years
later
opinion
governor
georgia
madrazo
pet
madrazo
vessel
carrying
slaves
seized
slaves
delivered
possession
governor
georgia
slaves
sold
proceeds
placed
state
treasury
madrazo
filed
libel
federal
district
naming
governor
georgia
among
others
defendant
restitution
ordered
lower
courts
reversed
although
demand
relief
nominally
governor
state
clear
action
fact
sought
relief
directly
state
treasury
relief
forbidden
eleventh
amendment
claim
upon
governor
governor
sued
name
title
demand
made
upon
made
personally
officially
decree
pronounced
person
officer
appeared
pronounced
successor
original
defendant
appeal
bond
executed
different
governor
filed
information
case
chief
magistrate
state
sued
name
style
office
claim
made
upon
entirely
official
character
think
state
may
considered
party
record
state
party
party
decree
made
person
natural
capacity
brought
defendant
proceeding
thing
person
person
capable
appearing
defendant
decree
pronounced
must
party
cause
decree
regularly
pronounced
emphasis
added
similar
effect
see
kentucky
dennison
reaffirmed
principles
madrazo
monell
emphasized
well
known
members
congress
time
passage
act
extent
davis
gray
wall
affirm
injunctive
decree
state
official
inconsistent
rule
applied
edelman
suffices
say
repudiated
long
latter
decision
ford
motor
department
treasury
stated
hen
action
essence
one
recovery
money
state
state
real
substantial
party
interest
entitled
invoke
sovereign
immunity
suit
even
though
individual
officials
nominal
defendants
addition
petitioner
eleventh
amendment
arguments
contends
appeals
notice
violates
law
case
established
edelman
jordan
disagree
doctrine
law
case
comes
play
respect
issues
previously
determined
sanford
fork
tool
remand
circuit
may
consider
decide
matters
left
open
mandate
accord
wells
fargo
taylor
edelman
considered
constitutionality
relief
presented
question
propriety
notice
relief
petitioner
also
claims
district
lacked
power
order
notice
terms
remand
simple
answer
contention
remanded
matter
edelman
proceedings
consistent
opinion
hold
today
award
notice
relief
fashioned
appeals
inconsistent
either
spirit
express
terms
decision
edelman
mandate
controlling
matters
within
compass
remand
lower
free
issues
sprague
ticonic
national
bank
citing
sanford
fork
tool
supra
appears
respondent
answers
district
request
expense
associated
preparation
mailing
notice
de
minimis
see
supra
january
aid
aged
blind
disabled
program
replaced
completely
supplemental
security
income
program
pub
title
iii
stat
petitioner
argues
notice
relief
impermissible
retroactive
benefits
ultimately
awarded
plaintiff
class
members
little
likelihood
federal
government
reimburse
state
assistance
payments
made
relating
defunct
program
thus
illinois
bear
total
cost
retroactive
payments
fact
may
well
relevant
state
agency
determination
whether
award
retroactive
benefits
since
notice
relief
constitute
money
judgment
relevant
question
propriety
notice
fashioned
appeals
petitioner
also
even
department
public
aid
determines
grant
retroactive
relief
may
request
comptroller
draw
treasurer
make
payments
funds
appropriated
current
fiscal
year
outstanding
obligation
incurred
prior
fiscal
year
without
express
authorization
legislature
see
reply
brief
petitioner
thus
result
lapse
public
aid
appropriations
fiscal
years
petitioner
claims
members
plaintiff
class
required
resort
filing
claims
state
illinois
claims
facts
may
influence
plaintiff
class
member
deciding
whether
pursue
existing
state
remedies
legislature
determining
whether
give
approval
payment
retroactive
benefits
affect
conclusion
notice
relief
awarded
permissible
eleventh
amendment
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
joins
parts
ii
iii
concurring
judgment
reasons
set
forth
dissent
edelman
jordan
concur
judgment
deeply
disturbing
however
engage
today
gratuitous
departure
customary
judicial
practice
reach
decide
issue
unnecessary
holding
today
correctly
rules
explanatory
notice
approved
appeals
properly
viewed
ancillary
prospective
relief
ante
sufficient
sustain
holding
notice
barred
eleventh
amendment
goes
conclude
patently
dicta
state
person
purposes
rev
stat
conclusion
significant
three
terms
ago
fitzpatrick
bitzer
held
congress
may
determining
appropriate
legislation
purpose
enforcing
provisions
fourteenth
amendment
provide
private
suits
state
officials
constitutionally
impermissible
contexts
state
person
purposes
therefore
immunity
eleventh
amendment
abrogated
statute
edelman
jordan
supra
held
override
state
immunity
reason
later
stated
fitzpatrick
civil
rights
act
held
monroe
pape
exclude
cities
municipal
corporations
ambit
case
intended
include
parties
defendant
premise
reasoning
undercut
last
term
however
monell
new
york
city
dept
social
services
upon
legislative
history
held
municipality
indeed
person
purposes
statute
stated
concurrence
hutto
finney
monell
made
surely
least
open
question
whether
properly
construed
make
liable
relief
kinds
notwithstanding
eleventh
amendment
dicta
today
close
open
question
basis
alabama
pugh
case
state
alabama
named
party
defendant
suit
alleging
unconstitutional
conditions
confinement
question
presented
hether
mandatory
injunction
issued
state
alabama
alabama
board
corrections
violates
state
eleventh
amendment
immunity
exceeds
jurisdiction
granted
federal
courts
held
state
named
party
defendant
pugh
however
stand
proposition
state
person
purposes
opinion
case
fail
even
mention
frames
issue
addressed
whether
alabama
consented
filing
suit
since
alabama
consent
irrelevant
congress
intended
encompassed
within
reach
apparently
decided
first
half
question
presented
hether
mandatory
injunction
issued
state
alabama
violates
state
eleventh
amendment
immunity
without
considering
deciding
second
half
whether
mandatory
injunction
exceeds
jurisdiction
granted
federal
courts
parsing
pugh
strengthened
consideration
circumstances
surrounding
decision
pugh
short
per
curiam
issued
last
day
term
without
assistance
briefs
merits
argument
alabama
petition
certiorari
respondents
brief
opposition
filed
february
april
respectively
months
monell
announced
thus
necessarily
without
benefit
monell
major
legislative
history
respondents
even
raise
possibility
alabama
might
person
purposes
since
issue
phrases
whether
members
aware
monell
ante
rather
whether
briefs
arguments
detailing
implications
monell
question
whether
state
person
purposes
anomalous
opinion
pugh
failed
address
consider
issue
reliance
pugh
particularly
significant
question
whether
state
person
purposes
neither
briefed
argued
parties
instant
case
indeed
petitioner
flatly
en
banc
decision
seventh
circuit
rest
upon
conclusion
term
person
purposes
includes
sovereign
opposed
state
officials
within
ambit
issue
issue
petitioner
writ
certiorari
reply
brief
petitioner
respondent
concurs
stating
unnecessary
case
confront
directly
question
whether
congress
intended
provide
relief
directly
municipalities
brief
respondent
thus
today
decides
question
major
significance
without
ever
assistance
considered
presentation
issue
either
briefs
arguments
result
pure
judicial
fiat
ii
fiat
particularly
disturbing
likely
incorrect
section
originally
enacted
civil
rights
act
act
enacted
purpose
enforcing
provisions
fourteenth
amendment
amendment
exemplifies
vast
transformation
worked
structure
federalism
nation
civil
war
mitchum
foster
prohibitions
amendment
directed
reference
actions
political
body
denominated
state
whatever
instruments
whatever
modes
action
may
taken
ex
parte
virginia
fifth
section
amendment
provides
congress
power
enforce
prohibitions
appropriate
legislation
congress
virtue
fifth
section
may
enforce
prohibitions
whenever
disregarded
either
legislative
executive
judicial
department
state
mode
enforcement
left
discretion
virginia
rives
prohibitions
fourteenth
amendment
congress
power
enforcement
thus
directed
merely
state
officers
logical
assume
therefore
effectuating
provisions
amendment
interpos
ing
federal
courts
people
guardians
people
federal
rights
mitchum
foster
supra
also
addressed
certainly
congress
made
intent
plain
enough
face
statute
section
civil
rights
act
created
federal
cause
action
person
color
law
statute
ordinance
regulation
custom
usage
state
deprived
another
rights
privileges
immunities
secured
constitution
february
less
two
months
enactment
civil
rights
act
congress
provided
acts
hereafter
passed
word
person
may
extend
applied
bodies
politic
corporate
unless
context
shows
words
intended
used
limited
sense
stat
monell
held
ince
nothing
context
civil
rights
act
calling
restricted
interpretation
word
person
language
section
prima
facie
construed
include
bodies
politic
among
entities
sued
even
opinion
today
dispute
fact
phrase
bodies
politic
corporate
certainly
referred
see
heim
mccall
mcpherson
blacker
poindexter
greenhow
cotton
chisholm
georgia
dall
iredell
cushing
utah
state
building
great
american
indemnity
utah
board
hamilton
county
noyes
rec
super
cincinnati
wilson
works
cf
keith
clark
munn
illinois
georgia
stanton
wall
butler
pennsylvania
penhallow
doane
administrators
dall
iredell
mass
preamble
indeed
debates
surrounding
enactment
civil
rights
act
referred
bodies
politic
corporate
see
cong
globe
hereinafter
globe
vickers
state
body
politic
corporate
cf
edmunds
thus
expressed
intent
congress
manifested
virtually
simultaneously
enactment
civil
rights
act
bodies
corporate
politic
embraced
term
person
act
legislative
history
civil
rights
act
reinforces
conclusion
act
originally
reported
house
representative
shellabarger
time
representative
shellabarger
stated
bill
meant
remedial
aid
preservation
human
liberty
human
rights
thus
liberally
beneficently
construed
globe
app
bill
meant
give
ull
force
effect
section
five
fourteenth
amendment
globe
stoughton
see
perry
monell
therefore
like
prohibitions
amendment
addressed
see
globe
wilson
edmunds
representative
kerr
opposed
bill
instantly
recognized
rights
union
globe
app
representative
shellabarger
introducing
bill
made
explicit
stressing
need
necessary
affirmative
legislation
enforce
personal
rights
constitution
guaranties
persons
state
state
see
perry
globe
lowe
wilson
edmunds
representative
bingham
elaborated
point
powers
limited
powers
congress
extended
last
three
amendments
constitution
last
amendments
thirteen
fourteen
fifteen
judgment
vest
congress
power
protect
rights
citizens
individuals
never
granted
advance
provide
denial
rights
whether
denial
acts
omission
commission
well
unlawful
acts
combinations
conspiracies
rights
people
never
right
though
power
inflict
wrongs
upon
free
citizens
denial
full
protection
laws
state
officials
constitution
required
bound
oath
affirmation
support
constitution
already
said
deny
citizens
equal
protection
laws
deny
rights
citizens
constitution
except
extent
express
limitations
upon
shown
citizen
remedy
took
property
without
compensation
remedy
restricted
freedom
press
remedy
restricted
freedom
speech
remedy
restricted
rights
conscience
remedy
bought
sold
men
remedy
dare
say
constitution
amended
nation
law
provide
abuses
denials
right
combination
persons
globe
app
emphasis
added
common
ground
therefore
representative
wilson
argued
prohibitions
fourteenth
amendment
directed
state
meaning
government
state
legislative
judicial
executive
fifth
section
amendment
given
congress
power
enforce
appropriate
legislation
meaning
legislation
adequate
meet
difficulties
encountered
suppress
wrongs
existing
furnish
remedies
inflict
penalties
adequate
suppression
infractions
rights
citizens
legislation
globe
opposed
bill
fully
aware
major
implications
statute
representative
blair
example
rested
opposition
fact
bill
including
aimed
corporate
legislative
capacity
inhibitions
thirteenth
fourteenth
fifteenth
amendments
corporate
legislative
capacities
thing
acts
prohibited
alone
performed
corporate
legislative
capacities
power
violate
individuals
must
presume
legislation
provided
corporate
legislative
capacity
character
acting
laws
individuals
sustained
view
case
tenth
section
first
article
constitution
number
inhibitions
evident
corporate
legislative
capacity
respectfully
call
attention
gentlemen
favor
bill
globe
app
reaches
draws
within
despotic
circle
central
power
domestic
internal
local
institutions
offices
asserts
arbitrary
paramount
control
rights
privileges
immunities
secured
protected
peculiar
sense
citizens
thereof
done
swallowed
institutions
tribunals
functions
leaves
shadow
globe
one
thinks
going
far
give
national
supervisory
power
protect
fundamental
rights
citizens
agree
wise
permit
devotion
reserved
rights
carried
far
deprive
citizen
privileges
immunities
must
remember
state
rights
perverted
admit
true
significance
arrayed
nation
threatened
existence
must
remember
purpose
placing
general
government
check
upon
arrogance
fourteenth
amendment
adopted
people
must
remember
legislation
propose
trench
upon
fourteenth
amendment
considered
rights
behalf
protection
immunities
privileges
clearly
given
constitution
federal
laws
federal
rights
must
protected
whether
domestic
laws
administration
interfered
constitution
laws
made
pursuance
thereof
law
land
making
constitution
enacting
law
virtue
tested
without
peril
experiment
frelinghuysen
iii
plain
words
legislative
history
historical
context
evidence
congress
intended
embraced
within
remedial
cause
action
today
pronounces
conclusion
dicta
avoiding
evidence
chooses
hear
eloquent
pointed
legislative
history
silence
silence
fact
deafening
ears
listen
without
reason
reach
question
without
briefs
without
argument
relying
precedent
equally
event
controlling
resolutely
opines
state
person
purposes
congress
course
longer
pronounce
meaning
unavoidable
clarity
fitzpatrick
however
cedes
present
congress
power
rectify
erroneous
misinterpretation
need
make
intention
plain
edelman
jordan
stated
suit
brought
illinois
citizens
illinois
officials
circumstance
illinois
may
invoke
eleventh
amendment
since
amendment
bars
federal
suits
citizens
rather
question
whether
illinois
may
avail
nonconstitutional
ancient
doctrine
sovereign
immunity
bar
respondent
claim
retroactive
aabd
payments
view
illinois
may
assert
sovereign
immunity
reason
expressed
dissent
employees
missouri
public
health
surrendered
immunity
hamilton
words
plan
convention
formed
union
least
insofar
granted
congress
specifically
enumerated
powers
see
parden
terminal
congressional
authority
enact
social
security
act
aabd
part
former
replaced
similar
provisions
supp
ii
found
art
cl
one
enumerated
powers
granted
congress
constitution
remain
opinion
surrender
immunity
exists
subject
congressional
declaration
voluntary
waiver
thus
occasion
inquire
whether
congress
authorized
action
aabd
retroactive
benefits
whether
illinois
voluntarily
waived
immunity
continued
participation
program
background
precedents
sustained
judgments
ordering
retroactive
payments
section
every
person
color
statute
ordinance
regulation
custom
usage
state
territory
subjects
causes
subjected
citizen
person
within
jurisdiction
thereof
deprivation
rights
privileges
immunities
secured
constitution
laws
shall
liable
party
injured
action
law
suit
equity
proper
proceeding
redress
question
enacted
congress
fourteenth
amendment
section
originally
first
section
act
entitled
act
enforce
provisions
fourteenth
amendment
constitution
stat
reasoning
employed
several
lower
courts
considered
question
see
ex
rel
gittlemacker
county
philadelphia
view
holding
monroe
pape
municipal
corporation
person
subject
suit
within
meaning
civil
rights
act
conclusion
persons
within
meaning
act
inescapable
williford
california
discussion
implications
monell
question
see
aldridge
turlington
civ
act
nd
take
significance
observation
brother
stevens
pugh
surely
intend
resolve
summarily
issue
debated
brothers
separate
opinions
hutto
finney
brennan
concurring
powell
concurring
part
dissenting
part
stevens
dissenting
cf
term
harv
rev
indeed
entire
discussion
issue
petition
certiorari
follows
grant
injunction
state
board
corrections
action
based
upon
direct
conflict
decisions
courts
appeal
hold
neither
state
state
agency
person
within
meaning
statute
amenable
suit
meredith
arizona
cir
curtis
everette
cir
decisions
conflict
least
principle
holding
city
kenosha
bruno
municipalities
persons
pet
cert
alabama
pugh
pp
discussion
issue
respondents
pugh
unilluminating
rule
certiorari
granted
special
important
reasons
therefor
second
issue
raised
petitioners
challenges
injunction
state
alabama
alabama
board
corrections
alleging
immune
suit
eleventh
amendment
neither
person
subject
jurisdiction
edelman
jordan
ex
parte
young
bar
judgments
state
prospective
costs
compliance
order
facts
cases
questions
presented
unimportant
essentially
irrelevant
first
additional
defendants
enjoined
include
members
alabama
board
corrections
numerous
prison
officials
clearly
remain
bound
injunction
issued
scheuer
rhodes
edelman
jordan
authority
official
capacity
carry
orders
second
state
alabama
board
corrections
named
defendants
pugh
case
james
case
therefore
action
taken
issue
pugh
affect
relief
granted
james
third
issue
never
thought
important
enough
counsel
petitioners
raise
brief
argue
trial
fourth
appeals
see
fit
speak
issue
fifth
whether
state
alabama
board
corrections
enjoined
addition
members
board
corrections
absolutely
practical
effect
happened
happen
order
brief
opposition
alabama
pugh
pp
see
supra
said
prohibitions
fourteenth
amendment
addressed
state
shall
make
enforce
law
shall
abridge
privileges
immunities
citizens
deny
person
within
jurisdiction
equal
protection
laws
congress
empowered
enforce
enforce
state
action
however
put
forth
whether
action
executive
legislative
judicial
enforcement
invasion
state
sovereignty
law
people
constitution
empowered
congress
enact
ibid
monell
new
york
city
dept
social
services
held
word
may
act
interpreted
equivalent
shall
mandatory
use
extended
meanings
words
defined
act
required
perform
intended
function
guide
rules
construction
acts
congress
see
cong
globe
remarks
sen
trumbull
phrase
also
referred
chief
justice
marshall
stated
government
consequently
body
politic
corporate
maurice
brock
cc
see
van
brocklin
tennessee
dugan
wheat
argument
attorney
general
william
writ
construing
meaning
term
person
texas
law
creating
statute
limitations
suits
recover
real
estate
person
peaceable
adverse
possession
thereof
stated
course
bound
laws
state
yet
word
person
statute
include
body
politic
corporate
sayles
art
martin
state
texas
stanley
schwalby
see
shirey
ohio
helvering
cf
pfizer
india
monell
supra
stated
doubt
civil
rights
act
intended
broadly
construed
see
lake
country
estates
tahoe
regional
planning
agency
post
senator
thurman
ohio
opposed
act
stated
respect
limitation
whatsoever
upon
terms
employed
comprehensive
used
cong
globe
app
hereinafter
globe
app
emphasis
added
one
reasons
given
hutto
finney
requiring
express
statutory
waiver
state
immunity
ante
applying
civil
rights
attorney
fees
award
act
act
enacted
enforce
fourteenth
amendment
common
ground
least
fourteenth
amendment
congress
dea
citizens
globe
frelinghuysen
see
poland
representative
willard
vermont
example
voted
opposed
sherman
amendment
held
municipal
corporation
liable
damages
inhabitants
private
persons
riotously
tumultuously
assembled
monell
supra
grounds
fourteenth
amendment
imposed
liability
directly
municipal
corporations
hold
duty
protection
rests
anywhere
rests
state
liability
visited
upon
anybody
failure
perform
duty
liability
brought
home
state
hence
judgment
section
liable
much
less
objection
regard
justice
constitutionality
provided
state
offenses
named
section
committed
suit
might
brought
state
judgment
obtained
payment
judgment
might
enforced
upon
treasury
state
globe
see
edmunds
general
agreement
however
congress
impose
affirmative
obligations
municipalities
monell
supra
command
state
officer
duty
whatever
globe
blair
see
farnsworth
collector
day
wall
kentucky
dennison
prigg
pennsylvania
pet
contrary
suggestion
ante
however
line
cases
stands
principle
federal
government
power
impose
state
officer
duty
whatever
militate
conclusion
persons
purposes
militates
conclusion
municipalities
persons
everyone
agreed
state
officers
subject
liability
violations
doctrine
coordinate
sovereignty
relied
line
cases
distinguished
liability
liability
state
see
monell
view
reach
suggested
occasional
remarks
legislative
history
effect
government
act
upon
individuals
globe
app
morton
rejected
last
term
monell
held
municipalities
persons
purposes
view
colored
belief
since
state
always
acts
instrumentalities
globe
hoar
state
violations
fourteenth
amendment
effectively
reached
imposing
liability
state
officials
acted
representative
burchard
stated
enforcement
observance
duties
imposed
directly
upon
people
constitution
general
government
applies
law
directly
persons
individual
acts
may
punish
individuals
interference
prerogatives
infractions
rights
authorized
protect
neglect
refusal
state
perform
constitutional
duty
remedies
power
enforcement
given
general
government
restricted
perform
duty
constitution
enjoins
upon
state
state
fails
appoint
presidential
electors
legislature
choose
senators
people
elect
representatives
congress
act
prohibitions
upon
authorize
congress
exercise
forbidden
power
may
doubtless
require
state
officers
discharge
duties
imposed
upon
officers
constitution
state
office
must
assumed
limitations
burdens
duties
obligations
constitution
attaches
general
government
punish
state
officer
violates
official
constitutional
duty
punished
federal
law
appropriate
legislation
enforcing
constitutional
prohibition
upon
state
compel
state
officers
observe
violation
state
consummated
officers
acts
globe
app
noteworthy
even
view
abrogate
eleventh
amendment
immunity
extent
necessary
provide
full
relief
plaintiff
suing
state
officer
cf
globe
arthur
lewis
globe
app
thurman
thus
even
limited
approach
emerged
concern
eleventh
amendment
immunity
distinction
prospective
relief
one
hand
retrospective
relief
ante
drawn
edelman
jordan
eliminated
congressional
enactment
anomalous
however
since
congress
way
anticipate
edelman
distinction
much
probably
mind
decision
chief
justice
marshall
osborn
bank
wheat
held
may
think
laid
rule
admits
exception
cases
jurisdiction
depends
party
party
named
record
consequently
amendment
restrains
jurisdiction
granted
constitution
suits
necessity
limited
suits
state
party
record
amendment
full
effect
constitution
construed
construed
jurisdiction
never
extended
suits
brought
state
citizens
another
state
aliens
state
party
record
jurisdiction
parties
record
true
question
one
jurisdiction
whether
exercise
jurisdiction
make
decree
defendants
whether
considered
real
interest
nominal
parties
four
years
later
per
chief
justice
marshall
stated
suit
office
opposed
person
governor
state
effect
making
state
party
record
governor
georgia
madrazo
pet
essential
principle
remained
unaltered
evidenced
davis
gray
wall
case
decided
two
years
civil
rights
act
deciding
parties
suit
look
beyond
record
making
state
officer
party
make
state
party
although
law
may
prompted
action
state
may
stand
behind
real
party
interest
state
made
party
shaping
bill
expressly
view
individuals
corporations
intended
put
relation
case
legislators
congress
therefore
action
directed
state
officers
regardless
effect
suit
state
preserve
eleventh
amendment
immunity
long
named
parties
extent
subsequent
decisions
introduced
eleventh
amendment
bar
suits
action
essence
one
recovery
money
state
ford
motor
department
treasury
bar
eliminated
congressional
enactment
since
instant
case
neither
state
illinois
office
governor
illinois
parties
record
even
limited
reading
reach
therefore
hold
eleventh
amendment
inapplicable
section
modeled
civil
rights
act
stat
imposed
criminal
penalties
person
color
law
statute
ordinance
regulation
custom
deprived
inhabitant
state
territory
right
secured
act
representative
shellabarger
stated
section
provides
criminal
proceeding
identically
case
one
provides
civil
remedy
globe
app
representative
bingham
noted
limited
application
remedy
provided
clear
congress
provide
penal
laws
protection
rights
guaranteed
fourteenth
amendment
violating
must
answer
crime
punishes
men
violation
law
globe
app
representative
bingham
thus
able
distinguish
apparently
ante
reach
word
person
civil
rights
act
reach
civil
rights
act
representative
blair
reached
conclusion
reasoning
bill
interpreted
applicable
individuals
able
fulfill
purposes
reconstruction
amendments
justice
marshall
concurring
judgment
concur
judgment
reasons
expressed
dissenting
opinion
edelman
jordan
concurring
opinion
employees
missouri
public
health
moreover
agree
affirmance
follows
logically
decision
edelman
explanatory
notice
approved
appeals
clearly
ancillary
prospective
relief
given
basis
deciding
present
case
entirely
unnecessary
address
question
whether
state
person
within
meaning
accordingly
join
parts
ii
iii
brother
brennan
opinion