edelman
jordan
argued
december
decided
march
respondent
brought
class
action
injective
declaratory
relief
illinois
officials
administering
programs
aid
aged
blind
disabled
aabd
funded
equally
state
federal
governments
contending
violating
federal
law
denying
equal
protection
laws
following
state
regulations
comply
federal
time
limits
within
participating
process
make
grants
respect
aabd
applications
district
permanent
injunction
required
compliance
federal
time
limits
also
ordered
state
officials
release
remit
aabd
benefits
wrongfully
withheld
persons
found
eligible
applied
therefor
july
date
federal
regulations
april
date
preliminary
injunction
appeals
affirmed
rejecting
state
officials
contentions
eleventh
amendment
barred
award
retroactive
benefits
judgment
inconsistency
federal
regulations
state
provisions
given
prospective
effect
held
eleventh
amendment
constitution
bars
portion
district
decree
ordered
retroactive
payment
benefits
pp
suit
private
parties
seeking
impose
liability
payable
public
funds
state
treasury
foreclosed
amendment
state
consent
suit
pp
appeals
erred
holding
ex
parte
young
awarded
prospective
relief
preclude
retroactive
monetary
award
ground
equitable
restitution
since
award
though
face
directed
state
official
individually
practical
matter
satisfied
general
revenues
state
indistinguishable
award
damages
state
ford
motor
department
treasury
followed
shapiro
thompson
state
dept
health
rehabilitation
services
zarate
sterrett
mothers
children
rights
organization
wyman
bowens
disapproved
extent
holdings
comport
holding
instant
case
eleventh
amendment
issue
pp
state
illinois
waive
eleventh
amendment
immunity
consent
bringing
respondent
suit
participating
federal
aabd
program
parden
terminal
petty
bridge
distinguished
mere
fact
state
participates
program
partially
funded
federal
government
manifest
consent
state
sued
federal
courts
pp
appeals
properly
considered
eleventh
amendment
defense
state
officials
assert
district
since
defense
partakes
nature
jurisdictional
bar
ford
motor
department
treasury
supra
pp
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
burger
stewart
white
powell
joined
douglas
post
brennan
post
filed
dissenting
opinions
marshall
filed
dissenting
opinion
blackmun
joined
post
robert
deputy
attorney
general
illinois
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
william
scott
attorney
general
donald
carnow
special
assistant
attorney
general
sheldon
roodman
argued
cause
filed
brief
respondent
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
jack
greenberg
charles
stephen
ralston
eric
schnapper
naacp
legal
defense
educational
fund
nancy
duff
levy
henry
freedman
nlsp
center
social
welfare
policy
law
justice
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
respondent
john
jordan
filed
complaint
district
northern
district
illinois
individually
representative
class
seeking
declaratory
injunctive
relief
two
former
directors
illinois
department
public
aid
director
cook
county
department
public
aid
comptroller
cook
county
respondent
alleged
state
officials
administering
programs
aid
aged
blind
disabled
aabd
manner
inconsistent
various
federal
regulations
fourteenth
amendment
constitution
aabd
one
categorical
aid
programs
administered
illinois
department
public
aid
pursuant
illinois
public
aid
code
rev
social
security
act
program
funded
state
federal
governments
department
health
education
welfare
hew
administers
payments
federal
government
issued
regulations
prescribing
maximum
permissible
time
standards
within
participating
program
process
aabd
applications
regulations
originally
issued
required
time
institution
suit
eligibility
determinations
must
made
within
days
receipt
applications
aid
aged
blind
within
days
receipt
applications
aid
disabled
persons
found
eligible
assistance
check
required
received
within
applicable
time
period
cfr
period
federal
regulations
went
effect
illinois
public
aid
officials
administering
benefits
pursuant
regulations
provided
categorical
assistance
manual
illinois
department
public
aid
respondent
complaint
charged
illinois
defendants
operating
regulations
improperly
authorizing
grants
commence
month
application
approved
including
prior
eligibility
months
applicant
entitled
aid
federal
law
complaint
also
alleged
illinois
defendants
processing
applications
within
applicable
time
requirements
federal
regulations
specifically
respondent
alleged
application
disability
benefits
acted
illinois
department
public
aid
almost
four
months
actions
illinois
officials
alleged
violate
federal
law
deny
equal
protection
laws
respondent
prayer
requested
declaratory
injective
relief
specifically
requested
permanent
injunction
enjoining
defendants
award
entire
class
plaintiffs
aabd
benefits
wrongfully
withheld
judgment
march
district
declared
illinois
manual
invalid
insofar
inconsistent
federal
regulations
found
cfr
granted
permanent
injunction
requiring
compliance
federal
time
limits
processing
paying
aabd
applicants
district
paragraph
judgment
also
ordered
state
officials
release
remit
aabd
benefits
wrongfully
withheld
applicants
aabd
state
illinois
applied
july
date
federal
regulations
april
date
preliminary
injunction
issued
district
determined
eligible
appeal
appeals
seventh
circuit
illinois
officials
contended
inter
alia
eleventh
amendment
barred
award
retroactive
benefits
judgment
inconsistency
federal
regulations
provisions
illinois
categorical
assistance
manual
given
prospective
effect
federal
regulations
question
inconsistent
social
security
act
appeals
rejected
contentions
affirmed
judgment
district
jordan
weaver
apparent
conflict
eleventh
amendment
issue
decision
appeals
second
circuit
rothstein
wyman
cert
denied
granted
petition
certiorari
filed
petitioner
joel
edelman
present
director
illinois
department
public
aid
successor
former
directors
sued
petition
certiorari
raised
contentions
urged
petitioner
appeals
believe
appeals
erred
disposition
eleventh
amendment
claim
reverse
portion
appeals
decision
affirmed
district
order
retroactive
benefits
paid
illinois
state
officials
historical
basis
eleventh
amendment
oft
stated
represents
one
dramatic
examples
effort
derive
meaning
document
given
nation
framers
nearly
years
ago
leading
historian
tells
us
right
federal
judiciary
summon
state
defendant
adjudicate
rights
liabilities
subject
deep
apprehension
active
debate
time
adoption
constitution
existence
right
disclaimed
many
eminent
advocates
new
federal
government
largely
owing
successful
dissipation
fear
existence
federal
power
constitution
finally
adopted
warren
history
rev
ed
issue
squarely
presented
suit
brought
august
term
two
citizens
south
carolina
executors
british
creditor
state
georgia
year
postponement
preparation
part
state
georgia
argument
rendered
february
decision
chisholm
georgia
dall
decision
case
state
liable
suit
citizen
another
state
foreign
country
literally
shocked
nation
sentiment
passage
constitutional
amendment
override
decision
rapidly
gained
momentum
five
years
chisholm
eleventh
amendment
officially
announced
president
john
adams
unchanged
since
amendment
provides
judicial
power
shall
construed
extend
suit
law
equity
commenced
prosecuted
one
citizens
another
state
citizens
subjects
foreign
state
hen
action
essence
one
recovery
money
state
state
real
substantial
party
interest
entitled
invoke
sovereign
immunity
suit
even
though
individual
officials
nominal
defendants
appeals
case
recognizing
hans
line
cases
permitted
state
raise
eleventh
amendment
defense
suit
citizens
nevertheless
concluded
amendment
bar
award
retroactive
payments
statutory
benefits
found
wrongfully
withheld
appeals
held
cases
read
light
landmark
decision
ex
parte
young
preclude
grant
monetary
award
nature
equitable
restitution
petitioner
concedes
ex
parte
young
supra
bar
part
district
judgment
prospectively
enjoined
petitioner
predecessors
failing
process
applications
within
time
limits
established
federal
regulations
petitioner
argues
however
ex
parte
young
extend
far
permit
suit
seeks
award
accrued
monetary
liability
must
met
general
revenues
state
absent
consent
waiver
state
eleventh
amendment
immunity
therefore
award
retroactive
benefits
district
improper
ex
parte
young
watershed
case
held
eleventh
amendment
bar
action
federal
courts
seeking
enjoin
attorney
general
minnesota
enforcing
statute
claimed
violate
fourteenth
amendment
constitution
holding
permitted
civil
war
amendments
constitution
serve
sword
rather
merely
shield
designed
protect
relief
awarded
ex
parte
young
prospective
attorney
general
minnesota
enjoined
conform
future
conduct
office
requirement
fourteenth
amendment
relief
analogous
awarded
district
prospective
portion
order
review
case
retroactive
portion
district
order
requires
payment
substantial
amount
money
held
paid
stands
quite
different
footing
funds
obviously
paid
pocket
petitioner
edelman
addressing
similar
situation
rothstein
wyman
cert
denied
judge
mcgowan
observed
pretended
payments
come
personal
resources
appellants
appellees
expressly
contemplate
rather
involve
substantial
expenditures
public
funds
state
one
thing
tell
commissioner
social
services
must
comply
federal
standards
future
state
benefit
federal
funds
programs
administers
quite
another
thing
order
commissioner
use
state
funds
make
reparation
past
latter
appear
us
fall
afoul
eleventh
amendment
basic
constitutional
provision
conceived
present
force
footnotes
omitted
appeals
upholding
award
case
held
permissible
form
equitable
restitution
instead
damages
therefore
capable
tailored
way
minimize
disruptions
state
program
categorical
assistance
must
judge
award
actually
made
case
one
might
differently
tailored
different
case
must
judge
context
important
constitutional
principle
embodied
eleventh
amendment
read
ex
parte
young
subsequent
holdings
indicate
form
relief
may
awarded
state
officer
matter
closely
may
practice
resemble
money
judgment
payable
state
treasury
long
relief
may
labeled
equitable
nature
opinion
ex
parte
young
hewed
line
citation
hagood
southern
ayers
actions
state
officers
specific
performance
contract
state
party
demonstrate
equitable
relief
may
barred
eleventh
amendment
areas
law
difference
type
relief
barred
eleventh
amendment
permitted
ex
parte
young
many
instances
day
night
injunction
issued
ex
parte
young
totally
without
effect
state
revenues
since
state
law
attorney
general
enjoined
enforcing
provided
substantial
monetary
penalties
railroads
conform
provisions
later
cases
authorized
equitable
relief
probably
greater
impact
state
treasuries
awarded
ex
parte
young
graham
richardson
arizona
pennsylvania
welfare
officials
prohibited
denying
welfare
benefits
otherwise
qualified
recipients
aliens
goldberg
kelly
new
york
city
welfare
officials
enjoined
following
new
york
state
procedures
authorized
termination
benefits
paid
welfare
recipients
without
prior
hearing
fiscal
consequences
state
treasuries
cases
necessary
result
compliance
decrees
terms
prospective
nature
state
officials
order
shape
official
conduct
mandate
decrees
likely
spend
money
state
treasury
left
free
pursue
previous
course
conduct
ancillary
effect
state
treasury
permissible
often
inevitable
consequence
principle
announced
ex
parte
young
supra
portion
district
decree
petitioner
challenges
eleventh
amendment
grounds
goes
much
cases
cited
requires
payment
state
funds
necessary
consequence
compliance
future
substantive
determination
form
compensation
whose
applications
processed
slower
time
schedule
time
petitioner
obligation
conform
different
standard
appeals
described
retroactive
award
monetary
relief
form
equitable
restitution
practical
effect
indistinguishable
many
aspects
award
damages
state
virtual
certainty
paid
state
funds
pockets
individual
state
officials
defendants
action
measured
terms
monetary
loss
resulting
past
breach
legal
duty
part
defendant
state
officials
uphold
portion
district
decree
obligated
overrule
holding
ford
motor
department
treasury
supra
taxpayer
protest
paid
taxes
state
indiana
sought
refund
taxes
indiana
state
officials
charged
collection
taxpayer
claimed
tax
imposed
violation
constitution
term
equitable
restitution
seem
even
applicable
relief
sought
case
since
taxpayer
one
time
money
paid
state
pursuant
allegedly
unconstitutional
tax
exaction
yet
hesitation
holding
taxpayer
action
suit
state
barred
eleventh
amendment
reach
similar
conclusion
respect
retroactive
portion
relief
awarded
district
case
appeals
expressed
view
conclusion
eleventh
amendment
issue
supported
holding
department
employment
held
entitled
sue
colorado
department
employment
district
refund
unemployment
compensation
taxes
paid
protest
american
national
red
cross
instrumentality
discussion
state
eleventh
amendment
claim
confined
following
sentence
opinion
respect
appellants
contention
state
colorado
consented
suit
federal
forum
even
plaintiff
see
monaco
mississippi
ex
parte
young
three
fairly
recent
district
judgments
requiring
state
directors
public
aid
make
type
retroactive
payment
involved
summarily
affirmed
notwithstanding
eleventh
amendment
contentions
made
state
officers
appealing
district
judgment
shapiro
thompson
instance
eleventh
amendment
objection
retroactive
relief
actually
presented
case
orally
argued
district
case
ordered
retroactive
payment
welfare
benefits
found
unlawfully
withheld
residence
requirements
held
violative
equal
protection
supp
affirming
judgment
opinion
refer
substantively
treat
eleventh
amendment
argument
course
summary
dispositions
three
district
cases
contain
substantive
discussion
issues
raised
parties
case
therefore
first
opportunity
taken
fully
explore
treat
eleventh
amendment
aspects
relief
written
opinion
shapiro
thompson
three
summary
affirmances
obviously
precedential
value
support
contention
eleventh
amendment
bar
relief
awarded
district
case
equally
obviously
precedential
value
opinion
treating
question
merits
since
deal
constitutional
question
less
constrained
principle
stare
decisis
areas
law
opportunity
fully
consider
eleventh
amendment
issue
briefing
argument
disapprove
eleventh
amendment
holdings
cases
extent
inconsistent
holding
today
appeals
held
alternative
even
eleventh
amendment
deemed
bar
retroactive
relief
awarded
respondent
case
state
illinois
waived
eleventh
amendment
immunity
consented
bringing
suit
participating
federal
aabd
program
appeals
relied
upon
holdings
parden
terminal
petty
bridge
dissenting
opinion
judge
bright
employees
department
public
health
welfare
holding
latter
case
ultimately
affirmed
think
answer
waiver
question
turns
distinction
parden
supra
employees
supra
parden
employees
involved
congressional
enactment
terms
authorized
suit
designated
plaintiffs
general
class
defendants
literally
included
state
instrumentalities
similarly
petty
bridge
supra
involved
congressional
approval
pursuant
compact
clause
compact
tennessee
missouri
provided
compacting
state
power
contract
sue
sued
name
question
waiver
consent
eleventh
amendment
found
cases
turn
whether
congress
intended
abrogate
immunity
question
whether
state
participation
program
authorized
congress
effect
consented
abrogation
immunity
case
threshold
fact
congressional
authorization
sue
class
defendants
literally
includes
wholly
absent
thus
respondent
precluded
relying
holding
employees
holdings
parden
petty
well
appeals
held
matter
federal
law
illinois
constructively
consented
suit
participating
federal
aabd
program
agreeing
administer
federal
state
funds
compliance
federal
law
constructive
consent
doctrine
commonly
associated
surrender
constitutional
rights
see
place
deciding
whether
state
waived
constitutional
protection
eleventh
amendment
find
waiver
stated
express
language
overwhelming
implications
text
leave
room
reasonable
construction
murray
wilson
distilling
see
reason
retreat
statement
great
northern
life
insurance
read
omitted
hen
dealing
sovereign
exemption
judicial
interference
vital
field
financial
administration
clear
declaration
state
intention
submit
fiscal
problems
courts
creation
must
found
brother
marshall
argues
dissent
appeals
held
although
social
security
act
create
private
cause
action
cause
action
created
coupled
enactment
aabd
program
issuance
hew
regulations
require
make
corrective
payments
successful
fair
hearings
provide
federal
matching
funds
satisfy
federal
orders
retroactive
payments
indicate
congress
intended
cause
action
public
aid
recipients
respondent
course
true
rosado
wyman
held
suits
federal
proper
secure
compliance
provisions
social
security
act
part
participating
heretofore
suggested
intended
create
waiver
state
eleventh
amendment
immunity
merely
action
brought
section
state
officers
rather
state
though
action
may
instituted
public
aid
recipients
respondent
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
respondent
urges
since
various
illinois
officials
sued
district
failed
raise
eleventh
amendment
defense
relief
sought
respondent
petitioner
therefore
barred
raising
eleventh
amendment
defense
appeals
appeals
apparently
felt
defense
properly
presented
dealt
merits
approve
resolution
since
well
settled
since
decision
ford
motor
department
treasury
supra
eleventh
amendment
defense
sufficiently
partakes
nature
jurisdictional
bar
need
raised
trial
attorney
general
indiana
appeared
federal
district
circuit
appeals
defended
suit
merits
objection
petitioner
suit
violation
eleventh
amendment
first
made
argued
indiana
time
however
eleventh
amendment
declares
policy
sets
forth
explicit
limitation
federal
judicial
power
compelling
force
consider
issue
arising
amendment
case
even
though
urged
first
time
ordered
footnotes
effective
january
aabd
program
replaced
similar
program
see
supp
ii
title
cfr
provides
pertinent
part
state
plan
requirements
state
plan
shall
provide
decision
shall
made
promptly
applications
pursuant
reasonable
time
standards
excess
days
aid
aged
blind
ii
days
aid
disabled
requirement
applicant
informed
agency
time
standard
acting
applications
covers
time
date
application
state
plan
date
assistance
check
notification
denial
assistance
change
award
eligibility
decision
respect
medical
assistance
mailed
applicant
recipient
addition
time
institution
suit
cfr
provided
pertinent
part
entitlement
begin
specified
state
plan
financial
assistance
must
later
date
authorization
payment
illinois
regulations
found
illinois
categorical
assistance
manual
illinois
department
public
aid
provide
pertinent
part
except
disability
cases
time
standard
days
time
standard
disposition
applications
days
date
application
date
applicants
determined
eligible
effective
date
first
assistance
determined
ineligible
receive
notice
denial
assistance
initial
awards
initial
awards
may
new
grants
reinstatements
certain
types
resumptions
effective
month
form
signed
prior
period
except
conditions
relevant
case
new
grants
new
grant
first
grant
authorized
application
accepted
case
previously
received
assistance
assistance
program
may
authorized
month
form
signed
prior
period
unless
meets
exceptions
relevant
case
paragraph
district
judgment
provided
defendant
edward
weaver
director
illinois
department
public
aid
agents
including
county
departments
public
aid
state
illinois
employees
persons
active
concert
participation
hereby
enjoined
release
remit
aabd
benefits
wrongfully
withheld
applicants
aabd
state
illinois
applied
july
april
sic
read
determined
eligible
follows
aged
blind
applicants
whose
first
full
aabd
check
mailed
within
thirty
days
date
application
aabd
assistance
period
beginning
thirtieth
day
date
application
date
applicant
entitlement
aabd
became
effective
disabled
applicants
applied
july
december
whose
first
full
aabd
check
mailed
within
days
date
application
aabd
assistance
period
beginning
day
date
application
date
applicant
entitlement
became
effective
ii
disabled
applicants
applied
january
april
whose
first
full
aabd
check
mailed
within
sixty
days
date
application
aabd
assistance
period
beginning
sixtieth
day
date
application
date
applicant
entitlement
became
effective
aabd
benefits
shall
mailed
persons
currently
receiving
aabd
within
eight
months
explanatory
letter
said
letter
first
approved
plaintiffs
attorney
aabd
benefits
received
pursuant
paragraph
shall
deemed
income
resources
article
iii
illinois
public
aid
code
persons
presently
receiving
aabd
certified
letter
return
receipt
requested
said
letter
first
approved
plaintiffs
attorney
shall
sent
last
known
address
person
informing
concise
easily
understandable
terms
entitled
specified
amount
aabd
benefits
wrongfully
withheld
may
claim
amount
contacting
county
department
public
aid
specified
address
within
days
receipt
said
letter
county
department
public
aid
receive
claim
aabd
benefits
within
days
date
actual
notice
person
right
said
aabd
benefits
shall
forfeited
file
shall
closed
persons
receive
actual
notice
forfeit
rights
aabd
benefits
wrongfully
withheld
provision
within
days
date
decree
defendant
edward
weaver
director
illinois
department
public
aid
shall
submit
plaintiffs
attorney
detailed
statement
method
effectuating
relief
required
paragraph
supra
decree
disputes
parties
whether
procedures
steps
outlined
defendant
weaver
fulfill
requirements
decree
resolved
respondent
appealed
district
judgment
insofar
held
entitled
receive
benefits
date
applications
opposed
date
authorization
benefits
provided
federal
regulations
insofar
failed
award
punitive
damages
appeals
upheld
district
decision
respondent
points
issue
citing
chevron
oil
huson
petitioner
also
contends
appeals
erred
refusing
give
district
judgment
prospective
effect
brief
petitioner
incorporating
arguments
made
pet
cert
appeals
concluded
ground
presented
district
judge
entry
judgment
comes
late
appeals
went
however
conclude
ven
ground
timely
presented
defendants
contention
meritless
ibid
nothing
one
three
tests
established
decision
huson
determining
retroactivity
decisions
decision
applied
nonretroactively
must
establish
new
principle
law
either
overruling
clear
past
precedent
litigants
may
relied
decided
issue
first
impression
whose
resolution
clearly
chevron
oil
huson
supra
appeals
found
petitioner
satisfied
test
since
federal
time
requirements
processing
applications
paying
eligible
aabd
applicants
made
effective
july
defendants
well
aware
mandatory
maximum
permissible
time
standards
light
disposition
case
eleventh
amendment
issue
see
reason
address
contention
former
title
provided
pertinent
part
contents
state
plan
aid
aged
blind
disabled
aid
aged
blind
disabled
medical
assistance
aged
must
provide
individuals
wishing
make
application
aid
assistance
plan
shall
opportunity
aid
assistance
shall
furnished
reasonable
promptness
eligible
individuals
debates
constitutional
convention
disclose
discussion
question
prevailing
view
time
ratification
constitution
stated
various
framers
writings
debates
period
examples
views
assembled
chief
justice
hughes
madison
virginia
convention
answering
objections
ratification
constitution
clearly
stated
view
purpose
effect
provision
conferring
jurisdiction
controversies
union
foreign
purpose
suitably
provide
adjudication
cases
consent
given
otherwise
madison
said
next
case
provides
disputes
foreign
state
one
case
ever
arise
citizen
foreign
citizen
subject
conceive
controversy
ever
decided
courts
american
state
foreign
state
without
consent
parties
consent
provision
made
elliot
debates
marshall
convention
expressed
similar
view
replying
objection
admissibility
suit
foreign
state
marshall
said
objects
next
place
jurisdiction
controversies
state
foreign
state
suppose
says
suit
foreign
state
cast
bound
decision
foreign
state
brought
suit
commonwealth
virginia
barred
claim
federal
judiciary
thought
unjust
previous
consent
parties
necessary
federal
judiciary
decide
party
acquiesce
elliot
debates
hamilton
federalist
made
following
emphatic
statement
general
principle
immunity
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
danger
intimated
must
merely
ideal
circumstances
necessary
produce
alienation
state
sovereignty
discussed
considering
article
taxation
need
repeated
recurrence
principles
established
satisfy
us
color
pretend
state
governments
adoption
plan
divested
privilege
paying
debts
way
free
every
constraint
flows
obligations
good
faith
contracts
nation
individuals
binding
conscience
sovereign
pretensions
compulsive
force
confer
right
action
independent
sovereign
purpose
authorize
suits
debts
owe
recoveries
enforced
evident
done
without
waging
war
contracting
state
ascribe
federal
courts
mere
implication
destruction
preexisting
right
state
governments
power
involve
consequence
altogether
forced
unwarrantable
monaco
mississippi
footnotes
omitted
appeals
district
columbia
circuit
sitting
designation
appeals
second
circuit
may
true
stated
brother
douglas
dissent
ost
welfare
decisions
federal
courts
financial
impact
post
agree
financial
impact
federal
applies
ex
parte
young
grant
prospective
declaratory
injunctive
relief
opposed
order
retroactive
payments
made
instant
case
necessarily
true
hether
decree
prospective
requires
payments
weeks
months
wrongfully
skipped
state
officials
nature
impact
state
treasury
precisely
post
argument
neglects
fact
state
definable
allocation
used
payment
public
aid
benefits
pursues
certain
course
action
processing
applications
within
certain
time
periods
illinois
subsequent
ordering
federal
retroactive
payments
correct
delays
processing
invariably
mean
less
money
available
payments
continuing
obligations
public
aid
system
stated
judge
mcgowan
rothstein
wyman
second
federal
policy
might
arguably
furthered
retroactive
payments
fundamental
goal
congressional
welfare
legislation
satisfaction
ascertained
needs
impoverished
persons
federal
standards
designed
ensure
needs
equitably
met
may
perhaps
cases
prompt
payment
funds
wrongfully
withheld
serve
end
time
goes
however
retroactive
payments
become
compensatory
rather
remedial
coincidence
previously
ascertained
existing
needs
becomes
less
clear
appeals
considered
decision
griffin
school
board
like
import
may
seen
griffin
citation
lincoln
county
luning
county
occupy
position
state
purposes
eleventh
amendment
see
also
moor
county
alameda
fact
county
policies
executed
county
officials
griffin
subject
commands
fourteenth
amendment
county
able
invoke
protection
eleventh
amendment
recognition
rule
county
action
generally
state
action
purposes
fourteenth
amendment
county
defendant
necessarily
state
defendant
purposes
eleventh
amendment
brief
respondent
decisions
summarily
affirmed
decision
lower
federal
ordered
payment
retroactive
awards
jurisdictional
statement
filed
raised
eleventh
amendment
defense
include
state
dept
health
rehabilitative
services
zarate
supp
sd
sterrett
mothers
children
rights
organization
unreported
order
judgment
district
nd
ind
remand
carpenter
sterrett
gaddis
wyman
supp
sdny
order
cch
poverty
law
transfer
binder
aff
per
curiam
sub
nom
wyman
bowens
words
justice
brandeis
stare
decisis
usually
wise
policy
matters
important
applicable
rule
law
settled
settled
right
commonly
true
even
error
matter
serious
concern
provided
correction
legislation
cases
involving
federal
constitution
correction
legislative
action
practically
impossible
often
overruled
earlier
decisions
bows
lessons
experience
force
better
reasoning
recognizing
process
trial
error
fruitful
physical
sciences
appropriate
also
judicial
function
burnet
coronado
oil
gas
dissenting
opinion
footnotes
omitted
respondent
urges
traditionally
broad
power
federal
sitting
equity
fashion
appropriate
remedies
necessary
effect
congressional
purposes
requires
district
award
retroactive
benefits
upheld
respondent
places
principal
reliance
prior
decisions
porter
warner
holding
mitchell
demario
jewelry
cases
dealt
power
federal
grant
equitable
relief
violations
federal
law
decision
mitchell
indicated
federal
provide
equitable
relief
complete
light
statutory
purposes
since
neither
cases
involved
suit
state
state
official
purport
decide
availability
equitable
relief
consistent
eleventh
amendment
hew
sought
passage
bill
congress
given
authority
require
retroactive
payments
eligible
persons
denied
benefits
bill
failed
pass
house
representatives
see
family
assistance
act
senate
committee
finance
comm
print
title
cfr
provide
federal
financial
participation
federal
financial
participation
available
following
items
payments
assistance
made
carry
hearing
decisions
take
corrective
action
appeal
prior
hearing
extend
benefit
hearing
decision
order
others
situation
directly
affected
decision
order
payments
may
retroactive
accordance
applicable
federal
policies
corrective
payments
payments
assistance
within
scope
federally
aided
public
assistance
programs
made
accordance
order
justice
marshall
appeals
respondent
herein
refer
language
rosado
wyman
effect
congress
legislating
social
security
act
closed
avenue
effective
judicial
review
individuals
directly
affected
administration
program
rosado
concerned
compatibility
provision
new
york
law
decreased
benefits
eligible
public
aid
recipients
amendments
federal
act
required
increases
case
purport
decide
eleventh
amendment
issue
resolve
today
finding
new
york
law
inconsistent
federal
law
justice
harlan
stated
new
york
course
way
prohibited
using
state
funds
according
whatever
plan
chooses
providing
violates
provision
constitution
follows
however
conclusion
new
york
program
incompatible
petitioners
entitled
declaratory
relief
appropriate
injunction
district
payment
federal
monies
according
new
schedules
state
develop
conforming
plan
within
reasonable
period
time
considered
rejected
argument
federal
without
power
review
state
welfare
provisions
prohibit
use
federal
funds
view
fact
congress
lodged
department
hew
power
cut
federal
funds
noncompliance
statutory
requirements
reluctant
assume
congress
closed
avenue
effective
judicial
review
individuals
directly
affected
administration
program
adhere
king
smith
implicitly
rejected
argument
statutory
provisions
hew
review
plans
read
curtail
judicial
relief
held
alabama
substitute
father
regulation
inconsistent
federal
statute
king
advert
specifically
remedial
problem
unarticulated
premise
state
alternative
choices
assuming
additional
cost
paying
benefits
families
substitute
fathers
using
federal
funds
pay
welfare
benefits
according
plan
inconsistent
federal
requirements
respondent
urges
state
illinois
abolished
sovereign
immunity
state
courts
appears
argue
suit
federal
state
may
thus
maintained
brief
respondent
petitioner
contends
sovereign
immunity
abolished
illinois
type
case
brief
petitioner
whether
illinois
permits
suit
brought
state
courts
determinative
whether
illinois
relinquished
eleventh
amendment
immunity
suit
federal
courts
chandler
dix
justice
douglas
dissenting
congress
provided
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
federal
jurisdiction
case
fact
ruled
adversely
claimant
constitutional
claim
deprive
pendent
jurisdiction
statutory
claim
georgia
pub
serv
ex
parte
young
suit
stockholders
railroad
brought
federal
state
officials
enjoin
imposition
confiscatory
rates
railroad
violation
fourteenth
amendment
eleventh
amendment
interposed
defense
rejected
defense
saying
state
officials
authority
enforce
state
laws
threaten
commence
proceedings
either
civil
criminal
nature
enforce
parties
affected
unconstitutional
act
violating
federal
constitution
may
enjoined
federal
equity
action
went
say
state
official
seeking
enforce
name
state
unconstitutional
act
comes
conflict
superior
authority
constitution
case
stripped
official
representative
character
subjected
person
consequence
individual
conduct
state
power
impart
immunity
responsibility
authority
complaint
instant
case
alleges
violations
officials
illinois
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
seems
case
governed
ex
parte
young
far
injective
relief
concerned
main
thrust
argument
instant
case
asks
relief
granted
affect
treasury
state
welfare
decisions
federal
courts
financial
impact
existing
cooperative
system
state
desiring
participate
submits
state
plan
hew
approval
hew
approves
plan
state
locked
cooperative
scheme
withdraws
described
king
smith
et
seq
welfare
cases
coming
involved
ultimately
financial
responsibility
state
beneficiaries
claiming
deprived
federal
rights
king
smith
required
payment
children
even
though
mother
man
pass
muster
parent
rosado
wyman
held
cooperative
program
state
reduce
standard
need
conflict
federal
standard
true
rosado
involve
retroactive
payments
involved
distinction
relevant
material
result
every
welfare
case
coming
increase
reduce
financial
responsibility
participating
state
case
responsibility
state
increased
meet
lawful
demand
beneficiary
levy
state
funds
whether
decree
prospective
requires
payments
weeks
months
wrongfully
skipped
state
officials
nature
impact
state
treasury
precisely
granted
relief
welfare
cases
included
retroactive
assistance
benefits
payments
state
dept
health
rehabilitative
services
zarate
sole
issue
presented
us
whether
eleventh
amendment
barred
judgment
state
officers
retroactive
welfare
assistance
benefits
payments
ordered
lower
summarily
affirmed
justice
white
voting
note
probable
jurisdiction
also
summarily
affirmed
judgment
sterrett
mothers
children
rights
organization
one
two
questions
whether
retroactive
payments
benefits
violated
eleventh
amendment
wyman
bowens
affirmed
judgment
payments
awarded
spite
argument
order
incursion
eleventh
amendment
shapiro
thompson
affirmed
judgment
ordered
payment
benefits
wrongfully
withheld
specifically
refer
point
lower
expressly
rejected
eleventh
amendment
argument
gaither
sterrett
supp
whose
judgment
affirmed
said
note
defendants
position
regarding
jurisdictional
bar
eleventh
amendment
correct
great
number
federal
district
judgments
void
affirmed
many
void
judgments
asked
instant
case
minor
compared
relief
granted
griffin
school
board
case
authorized
entry
order
putting
end
segregated
school
system
held
inter
alia
district
may
necessary
prevent
racial
discrimination
require
supervisors
exercise
power
levy
taxes
raise
funds
adequate
reopen
operate
maintain
without
racial
discrimination
public
school
system
prince
edward
county
like
operated
counties
virginia
held
vigorous
contentions
state
officials
eleventh
amendment
protected
state
reply
cited
lincoln
county
luning
kennecott
copper
state
tax
support
proposition
actions
county
maintained
courts
order
vindicate
federally
guaranteed
rights
griffin
sought
distinguished
ground
county
state
purposes
eleventh
amendment
constitutionally
county
griffin
exercising
state
policy
counties
otherwise
claim
denial
equal
protection
avail
counties
citizens
state
purposes
diversity
citizenship
bullard
city
cisco
moor
county
alameda
purposes
gives
original
exclusive
jurisdiction
controversies
two
illinois
city
milwaukee
citizens
state
suits
another
state
original
exclusive
jurisdiction
ibid
yet
agencies
state
whether
carrying
educational
policies
otherwise
state
griffin
held
purposes
fourteenth
amendment
griffin
like
present
case
dealt
liability
citizens
state
policy
state
action
yet
petitioner
asserts
money
damages
may
awarded
state
offenses
judgment
expend
state
treasury
unable
say
illinois
entering
welfare
program
waived
immunity
suit
injunctions
waive
immunity
compensatory
awards
remedy
willful
defaults
obligations
undertaken
joined
cooperative
venture
said
however
eleventh
amendment
concerned
immunity
suit
jurisdiction
federal
courts
entertain
suit
eleventh
amendment
speak
jurisdiction
withholds
judicial
power
federal
courts
suit
law
equity
one
judicial
power
jurisdiction
one
prefers
concept
may
exercised
even
suit
equity
ex
parte
young
overruled
none
eager
take
step
state
consented
join
cooperative
project
realistic
conclude
state
agreed
assume
obligations
legislation
nothing
eleventh
amendment
suggest
difference
suits
law
suits
equity
treats
two
without
distinction
common
sense
role
play
constitutional
adjudication
waiver
immunity
must
true
complete
far
effective
operation
joint
welfare
program
concerned
always
unanimous
concluding
state
waived
immunity
parden
terminal
alabama
sued
citizens
injuries
suffered
interstate
operation
alabama
railroad
state
defended
grounds
eleventh
amendment
held
alabama
liable
carrier
federal
employers
liability
act
saying
conclusion
simply
alabama
began
operation
interstate
railroad
approximately
years
enactment
fela
necessarily
consented
suit
authorized
act
conclusion
suit
may
maintained
accord
common
sense
nation
federalism
state
immunity
suit
individual
without
consent
fully
recognized
eleventh
amendment
subsequent
decisions
state
leaves
sphere
exclusively
enters
activities
subject
congressional
regulation
subjects
regulation
fully
private
person
corporation
argued
participation
program
federal
financial
assistance
sufficient
establish
consent
part
state
sued
federal
courts
merely
participation
supports
finding
eleventh
amendment
waiver
participation
light
existing
state
law
exhibited
decisions
shapiro
thompson
affirmed
judgments
ordering
retroactive
payment
benefits
today
holding
eleventh
amendment
forbids
retroactive
payments
recognizes
necessitates
express
overruling
several
recent
decisions
background
decisions
illinois
continued
participation
federal
program
hardly
claimed
participation
ignorance
possibility
retroactive
payments
decision
participate
background
precedent
viewed
waiver
immunity
judgments
affirm
judgment
appeals
effective
january
aabd
program
replaced
similar
program
see
supp
ii
program
illinois
administered
department
public
aid
rev
former
program
funded
part
state
part
federal
government
eleventh
amendment
provides
judicial
power
shall
construed
extend
suit
law
equity
commenced
prosecuted
one
citizens
another
state
citizens
subjects
foreign
state
speaking
justice
brennan
said
parden
terminal
although
eleventh
amendment
terms
applicable
since
petitioners
citizens
alabama
recognized
unconsenting
state
immune
suits
brought
citizens
well
citizens
another
state
hans
louisiana
duhne
new
jersey
great
northern
life
ins
read
fitts
mcghee
see
also
monaco
mississippi
social
security
act
state
plan
must
provide
time
suit
brought
provided
state
plan
aid
aged
blind
disabled
aid
aged
blind
disabled
medical
assistance
aged
must
provide
methods
administration
found
secretary
necessary
proper
efficient
operation
plan
provide
individuals
wishing
make
application
aid
assistance
plan
shall
opportunity
aid
assistance
shall
furnished
reasonable
promptness
eligible
individuals
include
reasonable
standards
consistent
objectives
subchapter
determining
eligibility
extent
aid
assistance
plan
secretary
hew
issued
mandatory
federal
time
standard
regulations
handbook
public
assistance
administration
pt
iv
cfr
illinois
adopted
standard
aged
blind
applicants
categ
assistance
manual
contrasted
hew
period
supra
conflict
exposes
merits
controversy
lower
opinion
found
supp
jurisdictional
statement
second
question
following
whether
federal
precluded
eleventh
amendment
constitution
ordering
state
agency
pay
money
state
treasury
ordering
state
agency
perform
certain
specified
acts
otherwise
discretion
agency
lower
opinion
found
supp
retroactive
payments
challenged
question
jurisdictional
statement
lower
opinion
found
supp
award
money
damages
alleged
violation
eleventh
amendment
part
jurisdictional
statement
jurisdictional
statement
sterrett
case
explicitly
urged
decree
violated
eleventh
amendment
since
expend
public
treasury
second
question
jurisdictional
statement
settled
rosado
wyman
question
whether
grant
authority
social
security
act
hew
cut
federal
funds
noncompliance
statutory
requirements
provides
exclusive
procedure
remedy
violations
act
said
reluctant
assume
congress
closed
avenue
effective
judicial
review
individuals
directly
affected
administration
program
justice
brennan
dissenting
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
department
public
health
welfare
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
affirm
judgment
appeals
justice
marshall
justice
blackmun
joins
dissenting
social
security
act
categorical
assistance
programs
including
aid
aged
blind
disabled
aabd
program
involved
fundamentally
different
federal
legislation
unlike
fair
labor
standards
act
involved
last
term
decision
employees
department
public
health
welfare
federal
employers
liability
act
issue
parden
terminal
social
security
act
impose
federal
standards
liability
upon
engage
certain
regulated
activities
including
state
agencies
instead
act
seeks
induce
state
participation
federal
welfare
programs
offering
federal
matching
funds
exchange
state
voluntary
assumption
act
requirements
find
basic
distinction
crucial
leads
conclude
participation
programs
waive
whatever
immunity
might
otherwise
federal
orders
requiring
retroactive
payment
welfare
benefits
contacts
social
security
act
assistance
programs
recent
years
frequently
described
act
scheme
cooperative
federalism
see
king
smith
jefferson
hackney
phrase
captures
number
unique
characteristics
programs
present
purposes
serves
emphasize
decision
participate
programs
voluntary
one
deciding
participate
however
necessarily
give
freedom
operate
assistance
programs
needy
see
fit
bind
conform
programs
requirements
federal
statute
regulations
explained
king
smith
supra
citations
omitted
required
participate
program
desire
take
advantage
substantial
federal
funds
available
distribution
needy
children
needy
aged
blind
disabled
required
submit
afdc
aabd
plan
approval
secretary
health
education
welfare
hew
plan
must
conform
several
requirements
social
security
act
rules
regulations
promulgated
hew
agreeing
comply
requirements
social
security
act
hew
regulations
believe
illinois
also
agreed
subject
suit
federal
courts
enforce
obligations
recognize
course
social
security
act
provide
cause
action
enforce
obligations
points
sanction
expressly
provided
act
participating
state
failure
comply
federal
requirements
cutoff
federal
funding
secretary
hew
former
supp
ii
cause
action
clearly
provided
terms
authorizes
suits
redress
deprivations
rights
secured
laws
already
rejected
argument
congress
intended
funding
cutoff
sole
remedy
noncompliance
federal
requirements
rosado
wyman
held
suits
federal
proper
enforce
provisions
social
security
act
participating
justice
harlan
writing
examined
legislative
history
found
slightest
indication
congress
intended
prohibit
suits
federal
enforce
compliance
federal
standards
believe
congress
also
intended
full
panoply
traditional
judicial
remedies
available
federal
courts
suits
surely
indication
congressional
intent
restrict
courts
equitable
jurisdiction
yet
held
nless
statute
many
words
necessary
inescapable
inference
restricts
jurisdiction
equity
full
scope
jurisdiction
recognized
applied
porter
warner
holding
congress
entrusts
equity
enforcement
prohibitions
contained
regulatory
enactment
must
taken
acted
cognizant
historic
power
equity
provide
complete
relief
light
statutory
purposes
mitchell
demario
jewelry
particular
firmly
convinced
congress
intended
restitution
wrongfully
withheld
assistance
payments
remedy
available
federal
courts
suits
benefits
categorical
assistance
programs
matter
statutory
entitlement
persons
qualified
receive
goldberg
kelly
retroactive
payment
benefits
secures
recipients
entitlement
withheld
violation
federal
law
equally
important
courts
power
order
retroactive
payments
essential
remedy
insure
future
state
compliance
federal
requirements
see
porter
warner
holding
supra
remedy
effectively
deter
strong
temptation
cut
welfare
budgets
circumventing
stringent
requirements
federal
law
funding
cutoff
drastic
sanction
one
hew
proved
unwilling
unable
employ
compel
strict
compliance
act
regulations
see
rosado
wyman
supra
douglas
concurring
moreover
cutoff
operates
prospectively
way
deters
even
flagrant
violation
act
requirements
long
hew
discover
violation
threaten
take
action
absent
remedy
may
act
retroactive
effect
state
welfare
officials
everything
gain
nothing
lose
failing
comply
congressional
mandate
assistance
paid
reasonable
promptness
eligible
individuals
idle
speculation
without
basis
practical
experience
case
example
illinois
officials
knowingly
violated
since
federal
regulations
strength
argument
invalidity
even
majority
deems
unworthy
discussion
ante
without
remedy
indeed
faced
specter
state
perhaps
calculatingly
defying
federal
law
thereby
depriving
welfare
recipients
financial
assistance
congress
thought
giving
jordan
weaver
like
appeals
believe
congress
possibly
intended
result
indicia
congressional
intent
gleaned
statute
confirm
congress
intended
authorize
retroactive
payment
assistance
benefits
unlawfully
withheld
availability
payments
implicit
fair
hearing
requirement
former
permitted
welfare
recipients
challenge
denial
assistance
regulations
require
make
corrective
payments
event
successful
fair
hearing
challenge
cfr
merely
confirm
obvious
statutory
intent
hew
regulations
also
authorize
federal
matching
funds
retroactive
assistance
payments
made
pursuant
order
cfr
lightly
disregard
explicit
recognition
agency
charged
administration
statute
remedy
authorized
congress
see
griggs
duke
power
illinois
chose
participate
aabd
program
eyes
wide
open
drawn
lure
federal
funds
voluntarily
obligated
comply
social
security
act
hew
regulations
full
knowledge
congress
authorized
assistance
recipients
go
federal
enforce
obligations
recover
benefits
wrongfully
denied
doubts
score
must
surely
removed
decisions
rosado
wyman
supra
shapiro
thompson
affirmed
district
retroactive
payment
order
avoid
conclusion
virtue
knowing
voluntary
decision
nevertheless
participate
program
state
necessarily
consented
subject
suits
quarrel
view
waiver
constitutional
rights
lightly
inferred
simply
believe
state
entered
essentially
contractual
agreement
federal
government
without
recognizing
subjecting
full
scope
remedy
provided
congress
enforce
terms
agreement
course
suits
nominally
brought
state
officers
rather
state
ordinarily
raise
eleventh
amendment
problems
view
decision
ex
parte
young
extent
relief
authorized
congress
action
may
open
eleventh
amendment
objections
objections
waived
state
agrees
comply
federal
requirements
enforceable
action
find
persuasive
reliance
case
fact
congressional
authorization
sue
class
defendants
literally
includes
absent
ante
true
fact
irrelevant
simply
case
literally
state
successfully
knocks
strawman
thus
set
never
comes
grips
undeniable
fact
congress
literally
authorized
suit
within
terms
since
every
reason
believe
congress
intended
full
panoply
judicial
remedies
available
equitable
actions
enforce
social
security
act
think
conclusion
inescapable
congress
authorized
state
consented
actions
relief
might
otherwise
questioned
eleventh
amendment
grounds
conclusion
state
waived
eleventh
amendment
objections
retroactive
assistance
payments
fully
consistent
last
term
decision
employees
department
public
health
welfare
emphasized
concurring
opinion
voluntary
action
state
employees
reasonably
construed
evidencing
consent
suit
federal
forum
state
fully
engaged
operation
affected
hospitals
schools
time
amendments
suggest
state
choice
either
ceasing
operation
vital
public
services
consenting
federal
suit
suffices
believe
demonstrate
state
true
choice
thereby
state
voluntarily
consent
exercise
federal
jurisdiction
indeed
lesson
drawn
decision
petty
bridge
found
waived
sovereign
immunity
commission
joining
interstate
compact
subject
approval
congress
petty
emphasized
called
interpret
unilateral
state
action
terms
consensual
agreement
congress
held
join
consensual
agreement
accepting
acting
assume
conditions
congress
constitution
attached
although
congressional
intent
regarding
clause
means
certain
held
surrounding
conditions
made
clear
accepting
waived
sovereign
immunity
especially
since
interpretation
necessary
keep
compact
living
interstate
agreement
performs
high
functions
federalism
find
approach
petty
controlling
even
dissent
case
recognized
frankfurter
dissenting
congress
undoubtedly
power
insist
upon
waiver
sovereign
immunity
condition
consent
agreement
since
satisfied
congress
fact
done
least
extent
federal
courts
may
complete
rather
truncated
justice
porter
warner
holding
actions
authorized
congress
state
welfare
authorities
respectfully
dissent
view
conclusion
issue
find
unnecessary
consider
whether
correctly
treats
suit
one
state
rather
suit
state
officer
permissible
rationale
ex
parte
young
noted
determination
case
state
action
unconstitutional
fourteenth
amendment
thus
necessarily
decide
whether
eleventh
amendment
sovereign
immunity
may
limited
later
enactment
fourteenth
amendment
extent
limitation
necessary
effectuate
purposes
amendment
argument
advanced
amicus
case
view
conclusion
sovereign
immunity
may
exist
waived
also
need
reach
issue