Skip to main content

“These Go to Eleven”



On February 7, 1795 the required three-fourths of the states ratified what would become the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution (although it wasn’t declared part of the Constitution until January 8, 1798). The Eleventh amendment to the Constitution is obviously the first amendment added to the Constitution after the ratification of the Bill of Rights, and began the true amending of the Constitution. From this point forward the Constitution would be amended to cure oversights and problems unanticipated by the Constitution’s drafters. The history of this amendment shows that the new nation was slowly maturing. 

The Eleventh Amendment was conceived as a response to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Chisholm v. Georgia (2 U.S. 419 (1793)). After the Revolutionary War Alexander Chisholm, representing the estate of Robert Farquhar, filed a lawsuit against the state of Georgia for unpaid debts incurred for supplies purchased during the recently ended war. Many other states owed money for war debts and they were nervous if Chisholm won his case in federal court.  The question of whether Chisholm could sue in federal court went to the Supreme Court. Georgia was so upset at being hauled into court that they didn’t even send a lawyer to represent them. The court held for Chisholm, allowing him to sue, and a landslide of lawsuits were filed against a variety of states. 

Congress realized this result could potentially bankrupt the states and took action. The Chisholm case was decided on February 18, 1793; on March 4, 1794 Congress sent an amendment to the states for ratification. The final state voted for ratification on February 7, 1795. 

Although the Eleventh Amendment’s immediate purpose was overturning Chisholm, it also acted to clarify federal court jurisdiction as laid out in Article III of the Constitution and in a way ratified the sovereign immunity of the States.  Citizens of one state can’t use the federal court system to sue the government of another state. Foreign citizen can’t use federal courts to sue a state government. A state government can’t be forced into federal court against its will; being a sovereign it can only be sued if it consents to the lawsuit. 

While the Eleventh Amendment may seem obscure, and not as sexy as those that make up the Bill of Rights of the Civil War amendments, its implications are far reaching in the areas of federalism and federal jurisdiction. Take some time today to celebrate the Eleventh Amendment, because after all, it’s bigger than ten.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Spying and International Law

With increasing numbers of foreign governments officially objecting to now-widely publicized U.S. espionage activities, the topic of the legality of these activities has been raised both by the target governments and by the many news organizations reporting on the issue.For those interested in better understanding this controversy by learning more about international laws concerning espionage, here are some legal resources that may be useful.

The following is a list of multinational treaties relevant to spies and espionage:
Brussels Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War (1874).Although never ratified by the nations that drafted it, this declaration is one of the earliest modern examples of an international attempt to codify the laws of war.Articles 19-22 address the identification and treatment of spies during wartime.These articles served mainly to distinguish active spies from soldiers and former spies, and provided no protections for spies captured in the act.The Hagu…

Citing to Vernon's Texas Codes Annotated: Finding Accurate Publication Dates (without touching a book)

When citing to a current statute, both the Bluebook (rule 12.3.2) and Greenbook (rule 10.1.1) require a  practitioner to provide the publication date of the bound volume in which the cited code section appears. For example, let's cite to the codified statute section that prohibits Texans from hunting or selling bats, living or dead. Note, however, you may remove or hunt a bat that is inside or on a building occupied by people. The statute is silent as to Batman, who for his own safety, best stay in Gotham City.
This section of the Texas Parks and Wildlife code is 63.101. "Protection of Bats." After checking the pocket part and finding no updates in the supplement, my citation will be:
Tex. Parks & Wild. Code Ann. § 63.101 (West ___ ). When I look at the statute in my bound volume of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, I can clearly see that the volume's publication date is 2002. But, when I find the same citation on Westlaw or LexisNexis, all I can see is that the …