fitzpatrick
bitzer
argued
decided
june
together
bitzer
chairman
state
employees
retirement
commission
et
al
matthews
et
also
certiorari
present
retired
male
employees
state
connecticut
petitioners
brought
class
action
alleging
inter
alia
certain
provisions
state
statutory
retirement
benefit
plan
discriminated
sex
violation
title
vii
civil
rights
act
amended
extends
coverage
employers
district
ruled
favor
entered
prospective
injunctive
relief
respondent
state
officials
denied
petitioners
request
award
retroactive
retirement
benefits
compensation
losses
caused
state
discrimination
well
reasonable
attorney
fee
part
costs
provided
title
vii
holding
constitute
recovery
money
damages
state
treasury
thus
precluded
eleventh
amendment
decision
edelman
jordan
district
award
welfare
benefits
wrongfully
withheld
held
violate
amendment
authorization
social
security
act
citizen
sue
state
appeals
reversed
matter
attorneys
fees
award
deemed
ancillary
effect
state
treasury
sort
permitted
edelman
otherwise
affirmed
held
eleventh
amendment
bar
backpay
award
petitioners
since
amendment
principle
state
sovereignty
embodies
limited
enforcement
provisions
fourteenth
amendment
grants
congress
authority
enforce
appropriate
legislation
substantive
provisions
fourteenth
amendment
embody
significant
limitations
state
authority
congress
determining
legislation
appropriate
enforcing
fourteenth
amendment
may
done
title
vii
provide
suits
constitutionally
impermissible
contexts
threshold
fact
congressional
authorization
citizen
sue
state
employer
absent
edelman
supra
thus
present
pp
congress
exercise
power
allowing
reasonable
attorneys
fees
similarly
barred
eleventh
amendment
pp
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
burger
stewart
white
marshall
blackmun
powell
joined
brennan
post
stevens
post
filed
opinions
concurring
judgment
paul
orth
argued
cause
petitioners
respondents
brief
austin
carey
edward
gallant
jack
greenberg
eric
schnapper
brief
carey
gallant
sidney
giber
assistant
attorney
general
connecticut
argued
cause
respondents
petitioners
briefs
carl
ajello
attorney
general
bernard
mcgovern
assistant
attorney
general
deputy
solicitor
general
wallace
argued
cause
amicus
curiae
cases
brief
solicitor
general
bork
assistant
attorney
general
pottinger
walter
fn
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
affirmance
filed
michael
gottesman
armand
derfner
robert
weinberg
albert
jenner
paul
dimond
william
caldwell
nathaniel
jones
vilma
martinez
joel
contreras
morris
baller
melvin
wulf
richard
larson
lawyers
committee
civil
rights
law
et
al
gary
greenberg
filed
brief
alan
rabinovitch
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
evelle
younger
attorney
general
jack
winkler
chief
assistant
attorney
general
eugene
hill
edward
assistant
attorneys
general
edmund
white
richard
skinner
gloria
dehart
patrick
golden
deputy
attorneys
general
state
california
louis
lefkowitz
attorney
general
samuel
hirshowitz
first
assistant
attorney
general
lillian
cohen
assistant
attorney
general
state
new
york
robert
kane
attorney
general
lawrence
silver
melvin
shuster
deputy
attorneys
general
commonwealth
pennsylvania
joined
attorneys
general
respective
follows
robert
shevin
florida
arthur
bolton
georgia
ronald
amemiya
hawaii
theodore
sendak
indiana
richard
turner
iowa
francis
burch
maryland
john
danforth
missouri
paul
douglas
nebraska
robert
list
nevada
david
souter
new
hampshire
william
hyland
new
jersey
rufus
edmisten
north
carolina
allen
olson
north
dakota
william
brown
ohio
daniel
mcleod
south
carolina
ashley
tennessee
john
hill
texas
andrew
miller
virginia
chauncey
browning
west
virginia
jack
greenberg
eric
schnapper
filed
brief
legal
defense
educational
fund
amicus
curiae
urging
affirmance
justice
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
amendments
title
vii
civil
rights
act
congress
acting
fourteenth
amendment
authorized
federal
courts
award
money
damages
favor
private
individual
state
government
found
subjected
person
employment
discrimination
basis
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
principal
question
presented
cases
whether
shield
sovereign
immunity
afforded
state
eleventh
amendment
edelman
jordan
congress
power
authorize
federal
courts
enter
award
state
means
enforcing
substantive
guarantees
fourteenth
amendment
appeals
second
circuit
held
effect
decision
edelman
foreclose
congress
power
granted
certiorari
resolve
important
constitutional
question
reverse
petitioners
sued
district
district
connecticut
behalf
present
retired
male
employees
state
connecticut
amended
complaint
asserted
inter
alia
certain
provisions
state
statutory
retirement
benefit
plan
discriminated
sex
therefore
contravened
title
vii
act
stat
amended
et
seq
ed
supp
iv
title
vii
originally
include
state
local
governments
interim
amended
bring
within
purview
district
held
connecticut
state
employees
retirement
act
violated
title
vii
prohibition
employment
discrimination
supp
entered
prospective
injunctive
relief
petitioners
favor
respondent
state
officials
petitioners
also
sought
award
retroactive
retirement
benefits
compensation
losses
caused
state
discrimination
well
reasonable
attorney
fee
part
costs
district
held
constitute
recovery
money
damages
state
treasury
therefore
precluded
eleventh
amendment
decision
edelman
jordan
supra
petitioners
appeal
appeals
affirmed
part
reversed
part
agreed
district
action
insofar
seeks
damages
essence
state
subject
eleventh
amendment
appeals
also
found
amendments
title
vii
congress
intended
authorize
private
suit
backpay
state
employees
state
notwithstanding
statutory
authority
appeals
affirmed
district
held
edelman
private
federal
action
retroactive
damages
constitutionally
permissible
method
enforcing
fourteenth
amendment
rights
reversed
district
remanded
attorneys
fees
however
reasoning
award
ancillary
effect
state
treasury
kind
permitted
edelman
supra
petition
filed
state
employees
contends
congress
possess
constitutional
power
fourteenth
amendment
authorize
title
vii
damages
action
state
state
officials
argues
edelman
eleventh
amendment
bars
award
attorneys
fees
paid
state
treasury
ii
edelman
held
monetary
relief
awarded
district
welfare
plaintiffs
reason
wrongful
denial
benefits
occurred
previous
entry
district
determination
wrongfulness
violated
eleventh
amendment
award
found
indistinguishable
monetary
award
state
prohibited
ford
motor
department
treasury
therefore
controlled
case
rather
ex
parte
young
permitted
suits
state
officials
obtain
prospective
relief
violations
fourteenth
amendment
edelman
went
hold
plaintiffs
case
avail
doctrine
waiver
expounded
cases
parden
terminal
employees
missouri
public
health
necessary
predicate
doctrine
congressional
intent
abrogate
immunity
conferred
eleventh
amendment
concluded
none
statutes
relied
upon
plaintiffs
edelman
contained
authorization
congress
join
state
defendant
civil
rights
act
held
monroe
pape
exclude
cities
municipal
corporations
ambit
case
intended
include
parties
defendant
provisions
social
security
act
relied
upon
plaintiffs
held
terms
authorize
suit
anyone
incapable
supplying
predicate
claim
waiver
part
state
parties
instant
litigation
agree
appeals
suit
retroactive
benefits
petitioners
fact
indistinguishable
sought
maintained
edelman
since
sought
damages
award
payable
private
party
state
treasury
analysis
begins
edelman
ended
title
vii
case
threshold
fact
congressional
authorization
sue
state
employer
clearly
present
course
prerequisite
found
present
parden
wanting
employees
aware
factual
differences
type
state
activity
involved
parden
involved
present
case
think
difference
material
purposes
congressional
authorization
involved
parden
based
power
congress
commerce
clause
however
eleventh
amendment
defense
asserted
context
legislation
passed
pursuant
congress
authority
fourteenth
amendment
ratified
civil
war
amendment
quite
clearly
contemplates
limitations
authority
relevant
part
provides
section
state
shall
make
enforce
law
shall
abridge
privileges
immunities
citizens
shall
state
deprive
person
life
liberty
property
without
due
process
law
deny
person
within
jurisdiction
equal
protection
laws
section
congress
shall
power
enforce
appropriate
legislation
provisions
article
impact
fourteenth
amendment
upon
relationship
federal
government
reach
congressional
power
examined
length
ex
parte
virginia
state
judge
arrested
indicted
federal
criminal
statute
prohibiting
exclusion
basis
race
citizen
service
juror
state
judge
claimed
statute
beyond
congress
power
enact
either
thirteenth
fourteenth
amendment
first
observed
amendments
intended
really
limitations
power
enlargements
power
congress
addressed
relationship
language
substantive
provisions
fourteenth
amendment
prohibitions
fourteenth
amendment
directed
degree
restrictions
state
power
congress
empowered
enforce
enforce
state
action
however
put
forth
whether
action
executive
legislative
judicial
enforcement
invasion
state
sovereignty
law
people
constitution
empowered
congress
enact
said
selection
jurors
courts
administration
laws
belong
state
rights
true
general
exercising
rights
state
disregard
limitations
federal
constitution
applied
power
rights
reach
extent
deny
general
government
right
exercise
granted
powers
though
may
interfere
full
enjoyment
rights
powers
thus
granted
indeed
every
addition
power
general
government
involves
corresponding
diminution
governmental
powers
carved
argument
support
petition
habeas
corpus
ignores
entirely
power
conferred
upon
congress
fourteenth
amendment
fifth
section
amendment
might
room
argument
first
section
declaratory
moral
duty
state
constitution
expressly
gives
authority
congressional
interference
compulsion
cases
embraced
within
fourteenth
amendment
limited
authority
true
extending
single
class
cases
within
limits
complete
doubt
line
cases
sanctioned
intrusions
congress
acting
civil
war
amendments
judicial
executive
legislative
spheres
autonomy
previously
reserved
legislation
considered
case
grounded
expansion
congress
powers
corresponding
diminution
state
sovereignty
found
intended
framers
made
part
constitution
upon
ratification
amendments
phenomenon
aptly
described
carv
ing
ex
parte
virginia
supra
true
none
previous
cases
presented
question
relationship
eleventh
amendment
enforcement
power
granted
congress
fourteenth
amendment
think
eleventh
amendment
principle
state
sovereignty
embodies
see
hans
louisiana
necessarily
limited
enforcement
provisions
fourteenth
amendment
section
congress
expressly
granted
authority
enforce
appropriate
legislation
substantive
provisions
fourteenth
amendment
embody
significant
limitations
state
authority
congress
acts
pursuant
exercising
legislative
authority
plenary
within
terms
constitutional
grant
exercising
authority
one
section
constitutional
amendment
whose
sections
terms
embody
limitations
state
authority
think
congress
may
determining
appropriate
legislation
purpose
enforcing
provisions
fourteenth
amendment
provide
private
suits
state
officials
constitutionally
impermissible
contexts
see
edelman
jordan
ford
motor
department
treasury
iii
state
officials
contest
appeals
conclusion
award
attorneys
fees
case
edelman
ancillary
effect
state
treasury
therefore
permitted
falling
outside
eleventh
amendment
doctrine
ex
parte
young
need
address
question
since
given
express
congressional
authority
award
case
brought
title
vii
follows
necessarily
holding
congress
exercise
power
respect
also
barred
eleventh
amendment
therefore
affirm
appeals
judgment
basis
judgment
reversed
affirmed
footnotes
shall
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
fail
refuse
hire
discharge
individual
otherwise
discriminate
individual
respect
compensation
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
limit
segregate
classify
employees
applicants
employment
way
deprive
tend
deprive
individual
employment
opportunities
otherwise
adversely
affect
status
employee
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
relevant
definition
person
act
stat
amended
equal
employment
opportunity
act
hereinafter
amendments
stat
supp
iv
include
governments
governmental
agencies
political
subdivisions
express
exclusion
state
political
subdivision
thereof
provided
former
stricken
latter
stat
supp
iv
section
amendments
stat
supp
iv
amended
act
include
within
definition
employee
individuals
subject
civil
service
laws
state
government
governmental
agency
political
subdivision
amendments
retained
right
individual
aggrieved
employer
unlawful
employment
practice
sue
behalf
upon
satisfaction
statutory
procedural
prerequisites
made
clear
right
extended
persons
aggrieved
public
employers
see
amendments
stat
supp
iv
petitioners
also
alleged
retirement
plan
contrary
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
view
ruling
title
vii
district
found
reason
address
constitutional
claim
respondent
bitzer
chairman
state
employees
retirement
commission
respondents
treasurer
comptroller
state
connecticut
officials
section
act
stat
amended
stat
supp
iv
provides
part
finds
respondent
intentionally
engaged
intentionally
engaging
unlawful
employment
practice
charged
complaint
may
enjoin
respondent
engaging
unlawful
employment
practice
order
affirmative
action
may
appropriate
may
include
limited
reinstatement
hiring
employees
without
back
pay
payable
employer
employment
agency
labor
organization
case
may
responsible
unlawful
employment
practice
equitable
relief
deems
appropriate
back
pay
liability
shall
accrue
date
two
years
prior
filing
charge
commission
see
act
stat
respondent
state
officials
appeal
district
finding
title
vii
violation
entry
prospective
injunctive
relief
appeals
rejected
petitioners
arguments
retroactive
benefits
paid
public
funds
state
treasury
rule
edelman
ford
motor
therefore
inapplicable
petitioners
challenged
ruling
dispute
enacting
amendments
title
vii
extend
coverage
employers
congress
exercised
power
fourteenth
amendment
see
pp
cf
national
league
cities
usery
section
neither
slavery
involuntary
servitude
except
punishment
crime
whereof
party
shall
duly
convicted
shall
exist
within
place
subject
jurisdiction
section
congress
shall
power
enforce
article
appropriate
legislation
apart
claim
eleventh
amendment
bars
enforcement
remedy
established
title
vii
case
respondent
state
officials
contend
substantive
provisions
title
vii
applied
proper
exercise
congressional
authority
fourteenth
amendment
see
supra
justice
brennan
concurring
judgment
suit
brought
present
retired
employees
state
connecticut
state
treasurer
state
comptroller
chairman
state
employees
retirement
commission
circumstance
connecticut
may
invoke
eleventh
amendment
since
amendment
bars
suits
citizens
rather
question
whether
connecticut
may
avail
nonconstitutional
ancient
doctrine
sovereign
immunity
bar
claim
damages
title
vii
view
connecticut
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
edelman
jordan
brennan
dissenting
parden
terminal
congressional
authority
enact
provisions
title
vii
issue
case
found
commerce
clause
art
cl
fourteenth
amendment
two
enumerated
powers
granted
congress
constitution
cf
oregon
mitchell
black
douglas
harlan
brennan
white
marshall
jj
stewart
katzenbach
morgan
remain
opinion
surrender
immunity
exists
subject
congressional
declaration
voluntary
waiver
employees
missouri
public
health
supra
therefore
concur
judgment
justice
stevens
concurring
judgment
opinion
commerce
power
broad
enough
support
federal
legislation
regulating
terms
conditions
state
employment
therefore
provides
necessary
support
amendments
title
vii
even
though
congress
expressly
relied
fourteenth
amendment
believe
plaintiffs
proved
violation
fourteenth
amendment
sure
amendments
needed
secure
guarantees
fourteenth
amendment
see
katzenbach
morgan
question
whether
amendment
adequate
reply
connecticut
eleventh
amendment
defense
believe
defense
rejected
different
reason
even
eleventh
amendment
cover
citizen
suit
state
bar
action
state
officers
enforcing
invalid
statute
ex
parte
young
since
connecticut
pension
law
held
invalid
least
part
ex
parte
young
makes
clear
federal
properly
acquired
jurisdiction
proceeding
eleventh
amendment
issue
presented
whether
power
enter
judgment
payable
immediately
trust
assets
subsequently
reimbursed
general
revenues
state
although
great
difficulty
construction
eleventh
amendment
acknowledges
federal
jurisdiction
case
merely
restricts
kind
relief
federal
may
grant
must
recognize
construed
edelman
jordan
language
opinion
seem
cover
case
however
actual
holding
appears
limited
situation
award
payable
directly
state
funds
necessary
consequence
compliance
future
substantive
determination
holding
edelman
necessarily
require
result
case
award
paid
directly
state
treasury
rather
two
separate
independent
pension
funds
fact
state
increase
future
payments
funds
consequence
award
opinion
sufficiently
distinguish
case
cases
state
may
required
conform
practices
federal
constitution
thereby
incur
additional
expense
future
since
rationale
ex
parte
young
remains
applicable
cases
since
case
squarely
covered
holding
edelman
persuaded
proper
reject
eleventh
amendment
defense
respect
fee
issue
even
eleventh
amendment
applicable
place
fees
category
litigation
costs
cf
fairmont
minnesota
chief
justice
marshall
pointed
eleventh
amendment
literally
applicable
situation
see
cohens
virginia
wheat
see
also
employees
missouri
public
health
brennan
dissenting
neither
language
eleventh
amendment
rationale
ex
parte
young
draws
distinction
proceedings
law
equity
amendment
provides
judicial
power
shall
construed
extend
suit
law
equity
commenced
prosecuted
one
citizens
another
state
citizens
subjects
foreign
state
amdt