federal maritime commission south carolina state ports authority et argued february decided may south carolina maritime services maritime services filed complaint petitioner federal maritime commission fmc contending respondent south carolina state ports authority scspa violated shipping act denied maritime services permission berth cruise ship scspa port facilities charleston south carolina praying fmc inter alia direct scspa pay reparations maritime services order scspa cease desist violating shipping act ask district district south carolina enjoin scspa refusing berthing space passenger services maritime services complaint referred administrative law judge alj found scspa arm state south carolina entitled sovereign immunity thus dismissed complaint reversing motion fmc concluded state sovereign immunity covers proceedings judicial tribunals executive branch agencies fourth circuit reversed held state sovereign immunity bars fmc adjudicating private party complaint nonconsenting state pp dual sovereignty defining feature nation constitutional blueprint integral component sovereignty retained entered union immunity private suits ratifying constitution consented suits brought sister federal government maintained traditional immunity suits brought private parties although eleventh amendment provides judicial power extend suit law equity brought citizens one state another state amdt provision define scope sovereign immunity instead one particular exemplification immunity result assumption fmc exercise judicial power adjudicating shipping act complaints filed private parties end inquiry whether sovereign immunity applies adjudications pp formalized administrative adjudications unheard late early centuries unsurprising specific evidence indicating whether framers believed sovereign immunity apply proceedings however presumption constitution intended rais proceedings anomalous unheard constitution adopted hans louisiana attributes great significance fact subject private suits administrative adjudications time founding many years thereafter pp decide whether hans presumption applies must determine whether fmc adjudications type proceedings framers thought possessed immunity agreed enter union previously noted aljs trial judges play similar roles adjudicative proceedings administrative adjudications judicial proceedings generally share numerous common features butz economou turning fmc adjudications specifically neither fmc disputes fourth circuit characterization proceeding walks talks squawks like lawsuit denies similarities identified butz administrative adjudications trial proceedings present fmc administrative proceedings bear remarkably strong resemblance federal civil litigation rules governing pleadings types proceedings quite similar discovery fmc adjudications largely mirrors federal civil litigation role alj similar article iii judge situations covered fmc rule commission rules practice procedure provide federal rules civil procedure used consistent sound administrative practice pp state sovereign immunity preeminent purpose accord dignity consistent status sovereign entities overwhelming similarities fmc adjudicative proceedings civil litigation lead conclusion fmc barred adjudicating private party complaint nonconsenting state framers thought impermissible affront state dignity required answer private parties complaints federal found acceptable compel state thing federal administrative tribunal quite strange congress prohibited exercising article powers abrogate state sovereign immunity article iii judicial proceedings permitted use powers create administrative tribunals sovereign immunity apply pp two arguments made support claim sovereign immunity apply fmc proceedings unavailing fmc orders mean state coerced participating fmc adjudicative proceeding state charged private party complaint violating shipping act option appearing fmc bid persuade body strength position substantially compromising ability defend sanctioned party litigate merits position later action brought attorney general enforce fmc nonreparation order civil penalty assessment choice clearly serves coerce participate fmc adjudications argument sovereign immunity apply fmc proceedings present threat financial integrity private judicial suits reflects fundamental misunderstanding sovereign immunity primary purpose shield state treasuries accord respect owed joint sovereigns event fmc reparation order may well result withdrawal funds state treasury fmc might able assess civil penalty state refused obey reparation order attorney general fmc request sought recover penalty federal state sovereign immunity extend suit brought federal government pp rejects fmc argument barred adjudicating maritime services complaint constitutional necessity uniformity maritime commerce regulation limits sovereignty respect federal government authority regulate commerce already held state sovereign immunity extends maritime commerce cases seminole tribe florida precludes creating new maritime commerce exception state sovereign immunity also rejected argument even fmc barred issuing reparation order precluded considering private party request nonmonetary relief type relief sought plaintiff suing state irrelevant question whether suit barred eleventh amendment sees reason principle also apply realm administrative adjudications pp affirmed thomas delivered opinion rehnquist scalia kennedy joined stevens filed dissenting opinion breyer filed dissenting opinion stevens souter ginsburg joined federal maritime commission petitioner south carolina state ports authority et al writ certiorari appeals fourth circuit may justice thomas delivered opinion case presents question whether state sovereign immunity precludes petitioner federal maritime commission fmc commission adjudicating private party complaint port violated shipping act app et seq ed supp hold state sovereign immunity bars adjudicative proceeding five occasions south carolina maritime services maritime services asked respondent south carolina state ports authority scspa permission berth cruise ship tropic sea scspa port facilities charleston south carolina maritime services intended offer cruises tropic sea originating port charleston cruises stop bahamas others merely travel international waters returning charleston intervening ports call trips passengers permitted participate gambling activities board scspa repeatedly denied maritime services requests contending established policy denying berths port charleston vessels whose primary purpose gambling result maritime services filed complaint contending scspa refusal provide berthing space tropic sea violated shipping act maritime services alleged complaint scspa implemented antigambling policy discriminatory fashion providing berthing space charleston two carnival cruise lines vessels even though carnival offered gambling activities ships maritime services therefore complained scspa unduly unreasonably preferred carnival maritime services violation app supp unreasonably refused deal negotiate maritime services violation app alleged scspa unlawful actions inflicted upon maritime services loss profits loss earnings loss sales loss business opportunities remedy injuries maritime services prayed fmc seek temporary restraining order preliminary injunction district district south carolina enjoining scspa utilizing discriminatory practice refuse provide berthing space passenger services maritime services direct scspa pay reparations maritime services well interest reasonable attorneys fees issue order commanding among things scspa cease desist violating shipping act award maritime services relief proper consistent fmc rules practice procedure maritime services complaint referred administrative law judge alj see cfr scspa filed answer maintaining inter alia adhered antigambling policy nondiscriminatory manner also filed motion dismiss asserting relevant scspa arm state south carolina entitled eleventh amendment immunity maritime services suit app scspa argued constitution prohibits congress passing statute authorizing maritime services file complaint commission thereby sue state south carolina damages injunctive relief alj agreed concluding recent decisions interpreting amendment state sovereign immunity private suits require maritime services complaint dismissed app pet cert emphasis original relying seminole tribe florida held congress pursuant article powers abrogate state sovereign immunity alj reasoned federal courts established article iii constitution must respect amendment immunity congress powerless override immunity article constitution irrational argue agency like commission created article statute free disregard amendment related doctrine state immunity private suits app pet cert emphasis original alj noted however decision deprive fmc authority look maritime services allegations shipping act violations enforce shipping act example fmc institute formal investigatory proceeding see cfr refer maritime services allegations bureau enforcement app pet cert maritime services appeal alj dismissal complaint fmc motion decided review alj ruling consider whether state sovereign immunity private suits extends proceedings commission concluded doctrine state sovereign immunity meant cover proceedings judicial tribunals whether federal state executive branch administrative agencies like commission result fmc held sovereign immunity bar commission adjudicating private complaints ports reversed alj decision dismissing maritime services complaint scspa filed petition review appeals fourth circuit reversed observing proceeding federal officer adjudicates disputes private parties unconsenting passed muster time constitution passage ratification eleventh amendment appeals reasoned uch adjudication equally invalid today whether forum state federal federal administrative agency reviewing precise nature procedures employed fmc resolving private complaints appeals concluded proceeding walks talks squawks much like lawsuit ts placement within executive branch blind us fact proceeding truly adjudication appeals therefore held scspa arm state south sovereign immunity precluded fmc adjudicating maritime services complaint remanded case instructions dismissed granted fmc petition certiorari affirm ii dual sovereignty defining feature nation constitutional blueprint see gregory ashcroft upon ratification constitution consent become mere appendages federal government rather entered union sovereignty intact blatchford native village noatak integral component residuary inviolable sovereignty federalist rossiter ed madison retained immunity private suits reflecting widespread understanding time constitution drafted alexander hamilton explained inherent nature sovereignty amenable suit individual without consent general sense general practice mankind exemption one attributes sovereignty enjoyed government every state union unless therefore surrender immunity plan convention remain emphasis original ratifying constitution surrender portion inherent immunity consenting suits brought sister federal government see alden maine nevertheless convention disturb immunity private suits thus firmly enshrining principle constitutional framework leading advocates constitution assured people uncertain terms constitution strip sovereign immunity sovereign immunity however fell peril early days nation history held chisholm georgia dall article iii authorized citizens one state sue another state federal decision fell upon country profound shock alden supra quoting warren history rev ed order overturn chisholm congress quickly passed eleventh amendment ratified speedily amendment clarified judicial power shall construed extend suit law equity commenced prosecuted one citizens another state citizens subjects foreign state since acknowledged chisholm decision erroneous see alden instead explicitly memorializing full breadth sovereign immunity retained constitution ratified congress chose text eleventh amendment address specific provisions constitution raised concerns ratification debates formed basis chisholm decision result eleventh amendment define scope sovereign immunity one particular exemplification immunity cf blatchford supra understood eleventh amendment stand much says presupposition constitutional structure confirms iii consider whether sovereign immunity enjoyed part constitutional framework applies adjudications conducted fmc petitioner fmc respondent initially maintain appeals erred sovereign immunity shields exercises judicial power fmc adjudications judicial proceedings support position point text eleventh amendment contend amendment reference judicial power suit law equity clearly mark immunity judicial process brief purposes case assume arguendo adjudicating complaints filed private parties shipping act fmc exercise judicial power assumption however end inquiry repeatedly held sovereign immunity enjoyed extends beyond literal text eleventh see alden supra holding sovereign immunity shields private suits state courts pursuant federal causes action blatchford supra applying state sovereign immunity suits indian tribes principality monaco mississippi applying state sovereign immunity suits foreign nations ex parte new york applying state sovereign immunity admiralty proceedings smith reeves applying state sovereign immunity suits federal corporations hans louisiana applying state sovereign immunity suits state citizens jurisdiction adhering precedent see part ii supra must determine whether sovereign immunity embedded constitutional structure retained joined union extends fmc adjudicative proceedings ook ing first evidence original understanding constitution alden well early congressional practice see find relatively barren historical record parties draw radically different conclusions petitioner fmc instance argues state sovereign immunity extend administrative adjudications evidence state immunity adjudication complaints executive officers established principle time adoption constitution brief petitioner emphasis original scspa hand asserts relevant congress attempt subject private suits federal administrative tribunals early days republic brief respondent scspa truth relevant history provide direct guidance inquiry framers envisioned limited federal government anticipated vast growth administrative state see alden supra souter dissenting proliferation government state federal amaze framers administrative state reams regulations leave rubbing eyes formalized administrative adjudications unheard late century early century dearth specific evidence indicating whether framers believed sovereign immunity apply proceedings unsurprising however applied presumption first explicitly stated hans louisiana supra constitution intended rais proceedings anomalous unheard constitution adopted therefore attribute great significance fact subject private suits administrative adjudications time founding many years thereafter instance asserts state entities long subject similar administrative enforcement proceedings reply brief earliest example provides occur see citing california canneries southern pacific decide whether hans presumption applies however must examine fmc adjudications determine whether type proceedings framers thought possessed immunity agreed enter union another case asking whether immunity present judicial context also applied administrative adjudications considered whether administrative law judges share absolute immunity suit article iii judges see butz economou examining case duties performed alj observed little doubt role modern federal hearing examiner administrative law judge functionally comparable judge powers often generally comparable trial judge may issue subpoenas rule proffers evidence regulate course hearing make recommend decisions importantly process agency adjudication currently structured assure hearing examiner exercises independent judgment evidence free pressures parties officials within agency citation omitted beyond similarities role alj trial judge also noted numerous common features shared administrative adjudications judicial proceedings ederal administrative law requires agency adjudication contain many safeguards available judicial process proceedings adversary nature conducted trier fact insulated political influence party entitled present case oral documentary evidence transcript testimony exhibits together pleadings constitutes exclusive record decision parties entitled know findings conclusions issues fact law discretion presented record ibid citations omitted therefore concluded butz administrative law judges entitled absolute immunity damages liability judicial acts turning fmc adjudications specifically neither commission disputes appeals characterization proceeding walks talks squawks much like lawsuit deny similarities identified butz administrative adjudications trial proceedings present see cfr review fmc rules practice procedure confirms fmc administrative proceedings bear remarkably strong resemblance civil litigation federal courts example fmc rules governing pleadings quite similar found federal rules civil procedure case commenced filing complaint see cfr fed rule civ proc defendant must file answer generally within days date service complaint see rule may also file motion dismiss see rule defendant also allowed file counterclaims plaintiff see rule defendant fails respond complaint default judgment may entered behalf plaintiff see rule intervention also allowed see rule likewise discovery fmc adjudications largely mirrors discovery federal civil litigation see app ed instructing fmc adjudicatory proceedings discovery procedures extent practicable shall conformity rules applicable civil proceedings district courts types proceedings parties may conduct depositions see cfr fed rule civ proc governed similar requirements compare rules parties may also discover evidence serving written interrogatories see rule requesting another party either produce documents see rule allow entry party property purpose inspecting property designated objects thereon rule submitting requests admissions rule party failing obey discovery orders either type proceeding subject variety sanctions including entry default judgment see rule discovery procedures virtually indistinguishable role alj impartial officer designated hear case see similar article iii judge alj authority arrange give notice hearing ibid hearing may prescribe order evidence shall presented dispose procedural requests similar matters hear rule upon motions administer oaths affirmations examine witnesses direct witnesses testify produce evidence available aid determination question fact issue rule upon offers proof dispose matter normally properly arises course proceedings ibid alj also fixes time manner filing briefs contain findings fact well legal argument see submission briefs alj issues decision includes statement findings conclusions well reasons basis therefor upon material issues presented record appropriate rule order section relief denial thereof relief may include order directing payment reparations aggrieved party see app supp cfr alj ruling subsequently becomes final decision fmc unless party filing exceptions appeals commission commission decides review alj decision initiative cases complainant obtains reparations alj may also require losing party pay prevailing party attorney fees see app cfr short similarities fmc proceedings civil litigation overwhelming fact extent situations arise course fmc adjudications covered specific commission rule fmc rules practice procedure specifically provide federal rules civil procedure followed extent consistent sound administrative practice preeminent purpose state sovereign immunity accord dignity consistent status sovereign entities see ayres founding generation thought neither becoming convenient several union invested large residuum sovereignty delegated summoned defendants answer complaints private persons alden quoting ayres supra given interest protecting dignity strong similarities fmc proceedings civil litigation hold state sovereign immunity bars fmc adjudicating complaints filed private party nonconsenting state simply put framers thought impermissible affront state dignity required answer complaints private parties federal courts imagine found acceptable compel state exactly thing administrative tribunal agency fmc cf alden supra private suits nonconsenting present indignity subjecting state coercive process judicial tribunals instance private parties regardless forum quoting ayres supra citations omitted emphasis added affront state dignity lessen adjudication takes place administrative tribunal opposed article iii instances state required defend adversarial proceeding private party impartial federal moreover quite strange prohibit congress exercising article powers abrogate state sovereign immunity article iii judicial proceedings see seminole tribe permit use article powers create administrative tribunals sovereign immunity suggests two reasons distinguish fmc administrative adjudications judicial proceedings purposes state sovereign immunity arguments unavailing first contends sovereign immunity apply fmc adjudications commission orders see brief whereas may enforce judgment exercise contempt power fmc enforce orders rather commission orders enforced federal district see app ed enforcement civil penalties enforcement nonreparation reparation orders presents valid distinction authority possessed fmc purposes case however distinction without meaningful difference extent highlights fact order suggest party alleged violated shipping act coerced participate fmc proceedings mistaken relevant statutory scheme makes quite clear absent sovereign immunity effectively required defend private parties front fmc state seeking contest merits complaint filed private party must defend front fmc substantially compromise ability defend example fmc issues nonreparation order either attorney general injured private party seeks enforcement order federal district sanctioned party permitted litigate merits position see limiting district review whether relevant order properly made duly issued moreover party fails appear fmc may argue merits position appeal commission determination filed iv see tucker truck lines simple fairness engaged tasks administration litigants requires general rule courts topple administrative decisions unless administrative body erred erred objection made time appropriate practice party choose ignore order issued fmc commission may impose monetary penalties day noncompliance see app supp commission may request attorney general seek recover amount assessed commission federal district see ed state sovereign immunity extend action one brought furthermore fmc issues order assessing civil penalty sanctioned party may later contest merits order enforcement action brought attorney general federal district see ibid limiting review whether assessment civil penalty regularly made duly issued interlink systems holding review whether order regularly made duly issued include review merits fmc order thus party including state charged complaint private party violating shipping act faced following options appear commission bid persuade fmc strength position stand defenseless enforcement commission nonreparation order assessment civil penalties sought federal district conclude choice coerce state participate fmc adjudication blind justice breyer maintain coercion participate fmc proceedings permissible consented actions brought federal government see alden ratifying constitution consented suits brought federal government attorney general decision bring enforcement action state conclusion commission proceedings however retroactively convert fmc adjudication initiated pursued private party one initiated pursued federal government prosecution complaint filed private party fmc plainly controlled rather controlled private party duty assumed fmc hence conjunction private complaint assess merits impartial manner indeed fmc even discretion refuse adjudicate complaints brought private parties see fmc choice adjudicate dispute result plainly exercise political responsibility complaints instead impermissibly effected broad delegation private persons sue nonconsenting alden supra next suggests sovereign immunity apply fmc proceedings present threat financial integrity private judicial suits see brief government highlights fact contrast nonreparation order attorney general may seek enforcement request commission reparation order may enforced district action brought private party award made see app points state sovereign immunity extend suit brought private party brief argument however reflects fundamental misunderstanding purposes sovereign immunity state sovereign immunity serves important function shielding state treasuries thus preserving ability govern accordance citizens alden supra doctrine central purpose accord respect owed joint sovereigns see puerto rico aqueduct sewer authority metcalf eddy see part supra reason instance sovereign immunity applies regardless whether private plaintiff suit monetary damages type relief see seminole tribe often made clear relief sought plaintiff suing state irrelevant question whether suit barred eleventh amendment sovereign immunity merely constitute defense monetary liability even types liability rather provides immunity suit statutory scheme interpreted thus permissible congress allowed private parties sue federal violations shipping act precluded awarding relief also worth noting fmc order state pay reparations private party may well result withdrawal funds state treasury state subject order conclusion fmc adjudicatory proceeding either make required payment injured private party stand violation commission order state willfully knowingly choose noncompliance commission assess civil penalty day state see app supp state refused pay penalty attorney general request commission seek recover amount federal district action one brought federal government state sovereign immunity extend sure suggests fmc statutory authority impose civil penalties violations reparation orders doubtful reply brief relevant statutory provisions however appear face confer authority reparation orders nonreparation orders distinguished parts statutory scheme see app ed provision addressing civil penalties makes distinction see supp whoever violates commission order liable civil penalty moreover even dispute fmc impose civil penalty state failing obey nonreparation order enforced attorney general also result levy upon state treasury iv two final arguments raised fmc remain addressed answered part reference decision seminole tribe fmc maintains sovereign immunity bar commission adjudicating maritime services complaint constitutional necessity uniformity regulation maritime commerce limits sovereignty respect federal government authority regulate commerce brief petitioner however already held sovereign immunity extends cases concerning maritime commerce see ex parte new york moreover seminole tribe precludes us creating new maritime commerce exception state sovereign immunity although federal government undoubtedly possesses important interest regulating maritime commerce see art cl noted seminole tribe background principle state sovereign immunity embodied eleventh amendment ephemeral dissipate subject suit area exclusive control federal government thus ven constitution vests congress complete lawmaking authority particular area eleventh amendment prevents congressional authorization suits private parties unconsenting ibid course federal government retains ample means ensuring ports comply shipping act valid federal rules governing commerce fmc example remains free investigate alleged violations shipping act either upon initiative upon information supplied private party see cfr institute administrative proceeding port see app ed cfr additionally commission may bring suit district enjoin conduct violation act app indeed advised us appeals ruling little practical effect fmc enforcement shipping act brief opposition reason believe decision affirm judgment lead parade horribles envisioned fmc finally maintains even sovereign immunity bar fmc adjudicating private party complaint port purposes issuing reparation order fmc precluded considering private party request forms relief order see brief previously noted however primary function sovereign immunity protect state treasuries see part supra afford dignity respect due sovereign entities result explained seminole tribe relief sought plaintiff suing state irrelevant question whether suit barred eleventh amendment see reason different principle apply realm administrative adjudications might complain system dual sovereignty model administrative convenience see post breyer dissenting purpose rather constitutionally mandated balance power federal government adopted framers ensure protection fundamental liberties atascadero state hospital scanlon quoting garcia san antonio metropolitan transit authority powell dissenting guarding encroachments federal government fundamental aspects state sovereignty sovereign immunity strive maintain balance power embodied constitution thus reduce risk tyranny abuse either front gregory ashcroft although framers likely envision intrusion state sovereignty issue today case nonetheless confident contrary constitutional design therefore affirm judgment appeals ordered federal maritime commission petitioner south carolina state ports authority et al writ certiorari appeals fourth circuit may justice stevens dissenting justice breyer explained recent sovereign immunity jurisprudence support today decision join opinion without reservation add words emphasize weakness two predicates majority holding predicates first recent decision alden maine second preeminent interest according dignity due ante justice souter already demonstrated alden creative conception state sovereign immunity true neither history structure constitution dissenting opinion previously explained dignity rationale embarrassingly insufficient seminole tribe florida dissenting opinion citation omitted part chief justice marshall early laid rest view purpose eleventh amendment protect state dignity citing cohens virginia wheat latter point reinforced legislative history eleventh amendment familiar learning amendment response decision chisholm georgia dall less recognized however chisholm necessarily decided two jurisdictional issues personal jurisdiction state defendant jurisdiction first proposed draft constitutional amendment responding chisholm introduced house representatives february day chisholm decided overruled first holding proposal adopted rather proposal introduced following day cast terms associate subject matter jurisdiction provided basis present text eleventh amendment legislative history suggests eleventh amendment best understood overruled chisholm jurisdiction holding thereby restricting federal courts diversity jurisdiction however amendment left intact chisholm personal jurisdiction holding constitution immunize federal process paramount concern eleventh amendment framers protecting dignity interest surely congress endorsed first proposed amendment granting immunity process rather later proposal merely delineates subject matter jurisdiction courts moreover chief justice marshall recognized reading amendment makes sense considering interest avoiding creditors see cohens virginia reasons majority chisholm concluded dignity interests underlying sovereign immunity english monarchs inherited original remain valid today see seminole tribe stevens dissenting extending untethered dignity rationale context routine federal administrative proceedings today decision even anachronistic alden federal maritime commission petitioner south carolina state ports authority et al writ certiorari appeals fourth circuit may justice breyer justice stevens justice souter justice ginsburg join dissenting holds private person bring complaint state federal administrative agency agency use internal adjudicative process decide complaint well founded proceed enforce law constitution contain principle law enunciates find answer question text tradition relevant purpose saying simply reiterate dissenting views set forth many recent sovereign immunity decisions see kimel florida bd regents alden maine college savings bank florida prepaid postsecondary ed expense seminole tribe florida even believe decisions properly stated law still accept conclusion outset one must understand constitutional nature legal proceeding us legal body conducting proceeding federal maritime commission independent federal agency constitutionally speaking independent agency belongs neither legislative branch judicial branch government although members referred agencies fourth branch government ftc ruberoid jackson dissenting agencies even independent agencies appropriately considered part executive branch see freytag commissioner scalia concurring part concurring judgment president appoints chief administrators typically chairman commissioners subject confirmation senate cf bowsher synar agencies derive legal powers congressionally enacted statutes agencies enforce statutes execute part making rules adjudicating matters dispute cf panama refining ryan long ago laid rest constitutional doubts whether constitution permitted congress delegate rulemaking adjudicative powers agencies icc cincinnati permitting rulemaking crowell benson permitting adjudication commodity futures trading schor part established certain safeguards surrounding exercise powers see schechter poultry nondelegation doctrine crowell supra requiring judicial review denied activities safeguarded however much might resemble activities legislature fell within scope article article iii constitution schechter poultry supra crowell supra see also ins chadha agency use rulemaking resemble lawmaking consequently exercising powers agency engaging article ii executive branch activity powers exercising powers executive branch government must possess enforce modern law administration constitutional understanding explains commentators courts often attached prefix quasi descriptions agency rulemaking adjudicative functions humphrey executor koch administrative law practice ed shapiro choice rulemaking adjudication development administrative policy harv rev friendly federal administrative agencies need better definition standards harv rev terms quasi legislative quasi adjudicative indicate agency uses legislative like like procedures constitutionally speaking either legislature see whitman american trucking freytag supra scalia concurring part concurring judgment case us presents fairly typical example federal administrative agency use agency adjudication congress enacted statute shipping act act shipping act app et seq ed supp among things forbids marine terminal operators discriminate terminal users supp act grants federal maritime commission authority administer act law grants commission authority enforce act variety ways example making rules regulations ed issuing revoking licenses supp conducting investigations issuing reports see generally ed supp also permits private person file complaint commission consider interestingly enough say commission must determine merits complaint agency adjudication see supp though present purposes see statutory lacuna matters regardless federal maritime commission decided evaluate complaints adjudicative process process involves assignment administrative law judge cfr hearing initial decision commission review final commission decision followed federal appellate review initial hearing like typical hearing involves neutral decisionmaker opportunity present case defense oral documentary evidence right written record typically constitutes basis decision cfr unlike typical proceeding agency process also may involve considerable hearsay resolution factual disputes use official notice see also final decisionmaking commission remains free disregard initial decision decide matter indeed application substantive well procedural rules commission created see cfr see also app ed rulemaking authority cfr outcome process often commission order say order tells party cease desist certain activity tells one party pay money damages called reparations another commission enforce order see app rather shipping act says obtain enforcement order providing money damages private party beneficiary order must obtain order adds obtain enforcement commission orders either private party attorney general must go also permits commission seek injunction prohibiting person violating shipping act supp authorizes commission assess civil penalties payable person fails obey commission order collect penalties commission must go ed supp upshot case involves typical executive branch agency exercising typical executive branch powers seeking determine whether particular person violated federal law cf davis pierce administrative law treatise describing typical agency characteristics cf also sec chenery particular person instance state entity south carolina state ports authority agency acting response request private individual first blush difficult see special circumstances matter constitution created federal government empowered enact laws bind empowered federal government enforce laws see knickerbocker ice stewart also left private individuals perfectly free complain federal government unlawful state activity left federal government free take subsequent legal action find constitutional principle principle constitution forbids executive branch agency determine ordinary adjudicative processes whether private complaint justified said find principle anywhere constitution ii principle lacks firm anchor constitution text eleventh amendment help says judicial power shall extend suit commenced prosecuted one citizens another state emphasis added federal administrative agencies exercise udicial power compare crowell benson explaining ordinary agency adjudication safeguards exercise article iii power freytag commissioner claims course read words citizens another state also said citizen state hans louisiana never said words udicial power mean executive power tenth amendment help says powers delegated constitution prohibited reserved respectively people constitution delegated power question power regulate commerce foreign nations among several art cl see california finds within delegation hidden reservation reservation due sovereign immunity embodies legal principle enunciates text tenth amendment says nothing hidden reservation one way indeed refers textual support earlier case namely alden maine holding sovereign immunity prohibits private citizen suing state state alden texts alden mentioned textual references include alexander hamilton described constitutional postulate namely retain immunity suits without consent unless surrender immunity plan convention internal quotation marks omitted alden majority called system federalism established constitution ibid alden majority called constitutional design see also souter dissenting noting opinion nowhere relied constitutional text considered purely constitutional text words constitutional design system federalism plan convention suffer several defects language highly abstract making difficult apply invite differing interpretations least much constitution broad phrases due process law word liberty compared latter phrases suffer additional disadvantage actually appear anywhere constitution cf generally harmelin michigan regardless unless supported considerations history constitutional purpose related consequence abstract phrases support today result iii conceding conception sovereign immunity ungrounded constitution text see ante attempts support holding history effort similarly destined fail history majority turned alden argues basic analogy federal administrative proceeding triggered private citizen private citizen lawsuit state alden said feudal law created legal norm effect lord sued vassal petty lord subject suit courts higher lord added framers silence matter woven feudal norm constitutional design made part system federalism unchanged plan convention norm said alden analogy forbids citizen vassal sue state lord lord courts norm argues immunity forum issue federal belonging analogy higher lord total silence state immunity article proceedings argue favor immunity event totally silent framers enunciated plan convention principle federal government may sue state without consent see west virginia also described first amendment right citizen petition federal government redress grievances see also cruikshank cf generally mark vestigial constitution history significance right petition ford rev first principle applies federal government private party light recent sovereign immunity jurisprudence see seminole tribe florida bring ultimate action necessary legally force state comply relevant federal law see supra second principle applies private citizen asked federal government determine whether state complied federal law take appropriate legal action course two principles apply analogy decision also relies analogy one jumps boundary constitution establishes yet analogy seems apt private citizen believing state violated federal law seeks determination executive branch agency right agency make determination use adjudicatory agency processes state fails comply federal government may bring action state federal enforce federal law legal history reinforces appropriateness description growth administrative state led determine administrative agencies article iii courts see crowell benson broad discretion proceed either agency adjudication rulemaking sec chenery choice made proceeding general rule individual ad hoc litigation one lies primarily informed discretion administrative agency may bring administrative enforcement proceedings minimum historically established legal principles argue strongly effort analogize present proceedings lawsuit brought private individual state state eleventh amendment type lawsuit brought private individual state federal say analogy citizen petitioning federal intervention historically speaking perfect one points framers may anticipated vast growth administrative state history debates provide direct guidance ante wrong ignore relevance importance framers say doubly wrong attach great legal significance absence administrative agency experience see ante even alive century anticipat vast growth administrative state ante write constitution designed provide framework government across centuries framework flexible enough meet modern needs read silence particular means instruction forbid use iv argues basic purpose sovereign immunity doctrine namely preservation state dignity requires application doctrine rests argument upon efforts analogize agency proceedings proceedings claim agency proceedings constitute form compulsion exercised private individual state explained believe efforts analogize agencies courts constitutionally speaking frail support conclusion neither claim compulsion provide necessary support viewed purely legal perspective compulsion claim far weak private individual lacks legal authority compel state comply law noted light recent sovereign immunity decisions individual bring suit enforce commission order see app ed state arguably free claim sovereign immunity see seminole tribe supra federal government acting commission attorney general authority compel state act typical instance private individual file complaint agency adjudicate complaint agency reach decision state subsequently may take matter order obtain judicial review adverse agency ruling opponent proceeding private party agency unlike administrative schemes see verizon public serv souter concurring slip commission party name alternatively state may nothing case either commission attorney general must seek order compelling state obey app ed supp commission private party may assess penalty state noncompliance acting commission request compel compliance penalty order sum one legally compel state obedience shipping act requirements without order case issue order absent state voluntary waiver sovereign immunity see atascadero state hospital scanlon absent request federal agency federal instrumentality alden distinguished sovereign immunity purposes lawsuit brought federal government lawsuit brought private person held principles sovereign immunity barred suit latter instance former former suit federal government require exercise political responsibility suit prosecuted state exercise political responsibility must take place every instance prior issuance order legal perspective compel state obey repeat without proceeding private individual legally force state act pay desist federal government may institute proceeding deciding whether federal government exercise appropriate political responsibility cf ibid viewed practical perspective compulsion claim proves far much certainly private citizen decision file complaint commission produce practical pressures upon state respond eventually comply commission decision appearing commission state able obtain full judicial review adverse agency decision appeals face opposition commission private party appearing state avoid potential monetary penalty complying avoid adverse political practical symbolic implications labeled federal lawbreaker practical pressures however sufficiently affront state dignity warrant constitutional sovereign immunity protections easy imagine comparable instances clearly lawful private citizen complaints government place state far greater practical pressures comply one doubts example private citizen complain congress may threaten state fail respond enact new law state opposes anyone deny private citizen complaining federal agency may seek rulemaking proceeding may lead agency state fail respond enact new agency rule state opposes private citizen may ask agency formally declare state compliance statute federal rule even though formal declaration may flow host legal consequences adverse state interests see ed supp environmental protection agency may declare state noncompliance federal water quality regulations one easily imagine legal scheme private individual files complaint like one us asks agency staff member investigate matter investigation lead order similar order issue similar legal practical consequences viewed solely terms practical pressures pressures upon state respond congress agency answer private citizen accusations oppose requests legally adverse agency congressional action seem less powerful issue one avoids temptation think mistakenly agency difficult see practical pressures issue affront state dignity mentioned latter create constitutional dignity problem former answer overeign immunity concerns implicated unless federal government attempts coerce answering complaints private parties adjudicative proceeding ante simply begs question entitled special constitutional protection direct response lies claim practical pressures special arising set statutes deprive nonresponding state meaningful judicial review agency determinations see ante explain makes kind pressure constitutionally special event response inadequate statutes clearly provide state full judicial review initial agency decision state choose seek review iv review affront state dignity takes place proceeding commission private party oppose state even congress easily resolve resulting problem making clear relevant statutes authorize full judicial review enforcement action brought state matter one might interpret existing statutes permitting actions whatever form judicial review constitution demands cf crowell benson brandeis concurring habit decide questions constitutional nature unless absolutely necessary decision justify today decision terms practical consequences decision permitting agency bring enforcement actions forbids use agency adjudication order help decide whether consequently agency must rely heavily upon informal staff investigations order decide whether citizen complaint merit natural result less agency flexibility larger federal bureaucracy less fair procedure potentially less effective law enforcement see pension benefit guaranty corporation ltv cf also shapiro harv one distinctive aspects administrative process flexibility affords selection methods policy formulation least one consequences forced growth unnecessary federal bureaucracy undermines constitutional objectives decision claims serve cf printz stevens dissenting name state rights majority federal government create vast national bureaucracies implement policies breyer dissenting consequences purely theoretical decision may undermine enforcement state employers many laws designed protect worker health safety see ed clean air act ed clean water act toxic substances control act ed solid waste disposal act see also rhode island dept environmental management may inhibit development federal fair rapid efficient informal responses complaints example improper medical care involving state hospitals cf generally macchiaroli medical malpractice screening panels proposed model legislation cure judicial ills geo rev decision threatens deny executive legislative branches government structural flexibility constitution permits modern government demands derives abstract notion state dignity structural principle limits powers congress president reasoning rests almost exclusively upon use formal analogy said jumps ordinary bounds places great significance upon century absence century administrative proceedings see ante conclusion draws little support considerations constitutional purpose related consequence readiness rest structural limitation little evidence willingness interpret limitation broadly majority ignores historical lesson reflected constitutional understanding adopted long ago overly restrictive judicial interpretation constitution structural constraints unlike protections certain basic liberties undermine constitution efforts achieve far basic structural aim creation representative form government capable translating people effective public action understanding underlying constitutional interpretation since new deal reflects constitution demands structural flexibility sufficient adapt substantive laws institutions rapidly changing social economic technological conditions reflects comparative inability judiciary understand either conditions need new laws new administrative forms may create reflects framers aspiration write document constitute democratic form government endure centuries change understanding led new deal reject overly restrictive formalistic interpretations constitution structural provisions thereby permitting congress enact social economic legislation circumstances led public demand led find constitution authorization new forms administration including independent administrative agencies legal authority flexibly implement execute adjudication rulemaking ways legislation congress subsequently enacted see yakus crowell benson believe departed basic understanding consistently dissented see kimel florida bd regents stevens dissenting seminole tribe florida souter dissenting decisions set loose interpretive principle restricts far severely authority federal government regulate innumerable relationships state citizen principle logical starting place fear neither logical stopping point today decision reaffirms need continued dissent unless consequences approach prove anodyne hope rather randomly destructive fear footnotes see app ed person may file commission sworn complaint alleging violation chapter may seek reparation injury caused complainant violation section provides marine terminal operator may give undue unreasonable preference advantage impose undue unreasonable prejudice disadvantage respect person section prohibits common carrier unreasonably refus ing deal negotiate see ed connection investigation conducted section commission may bring suit district enjoin conduct violation chapter upon showing standards granting injunctive relief courts equity met notice defendant may grant temporary restraining order preliminary injunction period exceed days commission issued order disposing issues investigation suit shall brought district defendant resides transacts business see supp complaint filed within years cause action accrued commission shall upon petition complainant notice hearing direct payment reparations complainant actual injury purposes subsection also includes loss interest commercial rates compounded date injury caused violation chapter plus reasonable attorney fees scspa created state south carolina instrumentality state among purposes develop ing improv ing harbors seaports charleston georgetown port royal handling commerce part south carolina foreign countries code ann appeals fourth circuit ruled scspa protected south carolina sovereign immunity arm state see ristow south carolina ports authority party case contests determination party case agrees fmc state sovereign immunity preclude commission adjudicating maritime services complaint scspa nonetheless respondent seek review appeals decision see rule instead opposed fmc petition certiorari see brief opposition extent justice breyer looking text eleventh amendment suggests sovereign immunity shields judicial power post dissenting opinion engage type ahistorical literalism rejected interpreting scope sovereign immunity since discredited decision chisholm alden maine furthermore ironic justice breyer adopts textual approach defending conduct independent agency lacks textual basis constitution see cfr requiring aljs shielded political influence manner consistent administrative procedure act addition nless inconsistent requirements administrative procedure act fmc rules practice procedure federal rules evidence applicable fmc adjudicative proceedings cfr one fact argue allowing private party haul state front administrative tribunal constitutes greater insult state dignity requiring state appear article iii presided judge life tenure nominated president confirmed senate contrary suggestion contained justice breyer dissenting opinion basic analogy federal administrative proceeding triggered private citizen private citizen lawsuit state state courts see post rather discussion makes clear apt comparison complaint filed private party state fmc lawsuit brought private party state federal justice breyer asserts use analogy case implicates first amendment right citizens petition federal government redress grievances see post constitution protects citizen right litigate state front federal administrative tribunal citizen right sue state federal types proceedings anomalous unheard constitution adopted hans louisiana private party plainly first amendment right haul state front either article iii federal administrative tribunal reparation order issued fmc contrast may enforced district action brought injured private party see part infra app justice breyer argues access full judicial review commission orders mitigates coercion participate fmc adjudicative proceedings post earlier concedes state must appear commission order obtain full judicial review adverse agency decision appeals post case therefore involve situation congress allowed party obtain full de novo judicial review commission orders without first appearing commission express opinion whether sovereign immunity apply fmc adjudicative proceedings circumstances justice breyer observation private citizens may pressure federal government variety ways take actions affect beside point see post sovereign immunity concerns implicated example federal government enacts rule opposed state see post entirely different matter however federal government attempts coerce answering complaints private parties adjudicative proceeding see part supra moreover state obviously know ex ante whether attorney general choose bring enforcement action therefore mere prospect may coerces state participate fmc proceedings state present arguments commission lost opportunity defend event attorney general later decides seek enforcement commission order commission assessment civil penalties see supra justice breyer apparently accept proposition see post maintaining supported text tenth amendment principle state sovereign immunity enshrined constitutional framework however rooted tenth amendment see part ii supra moreover extent justice breyer argues federal government article power regulate commerce foreign nations among several art cl allows authorize private parties sue nonconsenting see post quarrel decision today decision seminole tribe florida see reasons private parties remain perfectly free complain federal government unlawful state activity federal government remains free take subsequent legal action post breyer dissenting step fmc may take consistent sovereign immunity jurisprudence adjudicate dispute private party nonconsenting state footnotes see nelson sovereign immunity doctrine personal jurisdiction harv rev house proposal read state shall liable made party defendant judicial courts established shall established authority suit person persons whether citizen citizens foreigner foreigners body politic corporate whether within without quoting proceedings house representatives gazette reprinted documentary history pp marcus internal quotation marks omitted senate proposal read judicial power shall extend suits law equity commenced prosecuted one citizens another state citizens subjects foreign state nelson supra quoting resolution senate reprinted documentary history supra internal quotation marks omitted senate version closely tracked ultimate language eleventh amendment see amdt judicial power shall construed extend suit law equity commenced prosecuted one citizens another state citizens subjects foreign state nelson supra