Judicial Solicitude for State Dignity

Evan H. Caminker
Additional contact information
Evan H. Caminker: University of Michigan Law School

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2001, vol. 574, issue 1, 81-92

Abstract: The Supreme Court's recent decisions holding that Congress cannot authorize individuals to sue states proclaim that such sovereign immunity serves the states' "dignitary interests" by emphasizing "the respect owed them as members of the federation." What is the interpretive significance of the Court's apparent references to the social meaning of suits against states? This article explores whether the Court's professed concern with maintaining state dignity might be justificatory rather than rhetorical, with the Court invalidating statutes subjecting unconsenting states to private suit because those statutes entailed social meanings that contravene federalism values. Specifically, various expressivist rationales for the Court's sovereign immunity jurisprudence are sketched, and it is suggested that each rationale confronts significant difficulties that undermine the propriety of expressivist reasoning in this context.

Date: 2001
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000271620157400106 (text/html)

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:sae:anname:v:574:y:2001:i:1:p:81-92

DOI: 10.1177/000271620157400106

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().