Search for: ""Ex Parte Young" OR "209 U.S. 123"" Results 1 - 20 of 26
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Sep 2014, 10:20 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Here: Seminole Cert Petition Here is the question presented: This Court established in Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), that a plaintiff may sue state officials for prospective injunctive relief against the enforcement of an unconstitutional state law. [read post]
5 Sep 2006, 3:38 am
It may be overcome in three instances: (1) the state consents to suit; (2) Congress expressly abrogates the states' immunity; or (3) the citizen sues a state official pursuant to Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) . . . [read post]
22 Mar 2019, 12:24 pm by Samuel Bray
Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908). [read post]
29 Mar 2007, 7:49 pm
  The district judge declined to dismiss, holding that the case fell within the exception of Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), to sovereign immunity. [read post]
10 Sep 2021, 5:16 pm by Josh Blackman
The defendant officials thus lack any "enforcement connection" to S.B. 8 and are not amenable to suit under Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908). [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 9:43 pm by Steven M. Taber
” GE’s argument relied heavily on Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), and its progeny. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 11:29 am by Steven M. Taber
” GE’s argument relied heavily on Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), and its progeny. [read post]
10 Sep 2020, 1:30 pm by Will Baude
§ 1983; Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 155-156 (1908) (holding that federal courts may enjoin state officials to conform their conduct to federal law). [read post]
11 Jan 2022, 5:31 am by Michael C. Dorf
(5) Where does the doctrine of Ex Parte Young come from? [read post]
8 Oct 2021, 2:00 pm by Josh Blackman
Third, a federal court cannot enjoin a state court "from proceeding in [its] own way to exercise jurisdiction," Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 163 (1908), let alone enjoin all of a State's courts from doing so. [read post]
5 Jun 2008, 9:29 pm
More interesting is an argument that they had an implicit cause of action under Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) . [read post]
10 Jan 2022, 7:00 am by DONALD SCARINCI
In support, Justice Gorsuch noted that although the Supreme Court’s decision in Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), recognized a narrow exception allowing an action to prevent state officials from enforcing state laws that are contrary to federal law, the traditional exception does not normally permit federal courts to issue injunctions against state-court judges or clerks. [read post]
1 Jan 2008, 4:08 am
Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908)(upholding woman protective labor legislation)Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908)(creating legal fiction of suing state attorney general to permit suits against states and get around Hans v. [read post]
20 Oct 2019, 6:58 pm by Patricia Salkin
Accordingly, the Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) exception did not apply to Plaintiffs’ suit against the Circuit Court, and the court granted the Circuit Court’s Motion to dismiss the Complaint. [read post]
2 Dec 2019, 11:20 am by Eric Goldman
” The Court’s decision in Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), provides a longstanding work-around for states’ 11th Amendment immunity. [read post]
28 May 2009, 7:07 am
That's the rule laid down by two 101-year-old companion cases, Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) and General Oil Co. v. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 6:48 am by Juan C. Antúnez
Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 180 (1961); see also Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) (allowing injunctive relief against a state official for violations of federal law). [read post]
4 Jun 2010, 10:41 am by Andrew Frisch
Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 157, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908); see also Virginia v. [read post]