"An Innate Sense of Fairness": State Responses to the U.S. Supreme Court's Sovereign Immunity Decisions

Matthew H. Bosworth

Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 2006, vol. 36, issue 3, 393-420

Abstract: The U.S. Supreme Court's recent revival of state sovereign immunity is usually cited as a significant development in modern U.S. federalism. These decisions giving states a powerful defense against lawsuits lead to the question: How will the states react to the Court's rulings? How likely is it that states will consent to be sued? This article discusses the consequences of the Court's sovereign immunity rulings specifically concerning state legislative debates over immunity waiver bills. It explains why some states have been willing to waive immunity, despite the Court majority's fears of a flood of lawsuits if states did not enjoy immunity. Copyright 2006, Oxford University Press.

Date: 2006
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pjj025 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:publus:v:36:y:2006:i:3:p:393-420

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

Publius: The Journal of Federalism is currently edited by Paul Nolette and Philip Rocco

More articles in Publius: The Journal of Federalism from CSF Associates Inc. Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().