Eleventh Amendment - Suits Against States
States can't be sued in federal court by citizens of other states or countries. This overturned [Chisholm v. Georgia (1793)](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/2us419), where the Supreme Court allowed such suits in a [4–1 decision on February 18, 1793](https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/chisholm-v-georgia.htm). Congress proposed the amendment at its very next session, passing it on [March 4, 1794](https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt11-2/ALDE_00013676/), and 12 of the 15 states ratified it by [February 7, 1795](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleventh_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution).
Original Text
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
States generally can't be sued in federal court without their consent. But the sovereign immunity doctrine is broader than the Eleventh Amendment's text: the amendment, on its face, only bars federal court suits by citizens of other states. The Supreme Court has extended that immunity to bar citizens from suing their own states in federal court—a reading grounded in constitutional structure rather than the amendment's literal words.
Two doctrinal exceptions do most of the practical work. *Ex parte Young* (1908) allows federal courts to order state officials to stop ongoing violations of federal law, even though the state itself retains immunity. Congress can also override immunity when enforcing the Fourteenth Amendment—the basis for most federal civil rights damages lawsuits against state officials.
Outside those exceptions, states generally can't be held liable for money damages in federal court unless they voluntarily waive their immunity.
Check your understanding
Key Concepts0/6
Historical Context
In [*Chisholm v. Georgia* (1793)](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/2us419), the Supreme Court let Alexander Chisholm sue Georgia for $169,613 in unpaid Revolutionary War supplies. The 4-1 ruling outraged state governments: if private citizens could drag states into federal court, states faced potential bankruptcy from war debts. Congress proposed the Eleventh Amendment at its next session by overwhelming votes—the Senate 23-2 on January 14, 1794, and the House 81-9 on March 4, 1794. Twelve of the then-15 states ratified it by February 7, 1795, less than two years after *Chisholm*. It became one of the first constitutional amendments to overturn a Supreme Court ruling. The Court's sovereign immunity doctrine extends well beyond the amendment's literal text. In [*Hans v. Louisiana* (1890)](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/134/1/), the Court blocked citizens from suing their own states in federal court, even though the Eleventh Amendment text only bars suits "by citizens of another state." Justice Bradley held that sovereign immunity was a foundational structural principle that the amendment exemplified but didn't exhaust. Two critical safety valves followed. In [*Ex parte Young* (1908)](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/209us123), the Court held that a federal court can enjoin a state official who is personally violating federal law—even though the state itself retains immunity—because an unconstitutional act by a state officer isn't a state act at all. In [*Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer* (1976)](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1975/74-1306), the Court held that Congress can abrogate state sovereign immunity when legislating under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.
How This Shows Up Today
- Limits on ADA and FMLA suits against states
- State university employees cannot sue for damages
- Seminole Tribe v. Florida (1996) limited congressional abrogation
Discussion Questions4
Loading questions...
Preparing comprehension questions for this section