517 U.S. 44

The abrogation doctrine is a doctrine in United States constitutional law which permits the U.S. Congress to allow lawsuits seeking monetary damages against individual U.S. states, so long as this is usually done pursuant to a constitutional limitation on the power of the states. Where the immunity of the states is waived, it is most frequently pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment, which allows Congress to enforce its guarantees on the states and effectively overrides states' Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity. < ...

Including:

• Abrogation doctrine - Development

Read more here: » Abrogation doctrine: Encyclopedia - Abrogation doctrine

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, known as the Commerce Clause, empowers the United States Congress "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." Courts and commentators have tended to discuss each of these three areas as a separate power granted to Congress. It is therefore common to see references to the Foreign Commerce Clause, the Interstate Commerce Clause, and the Indian Commerce Clause, each of which refer ...

Including:

• Commerce Clause - Significance
• Commerce Clause - History
• Commerce Clause - Original understanding
• Commerce Clause - Early years 1824-1935
• Commerce Clause - New Deal
• Commerce Clause - Civil rights
• Commerce Clause - The Rehnquist Court

Read more here: » Commerce Clause: Encyclopedia - Commerce Clause

Commerce Clause - Original understanding. The founders' understanding of the word "commerce" is unclear. Although commerce means economic activity today, it had much broader and non-economic meanings at the time. For example, in 18th Century writing one finds expressions such as "the free and easy commerce of social life" and "our Lord's commerce with his disciples". Further, interpreting interstate commerce to mean "interstate human interaction" makes more sense for the Indian commerce clause as one would expect Congress to be given authority to regulate non-economic relations wi ...

See also:

Commerce Clause, Commerce Clause - Significance, Commerce Clause - History, Commerce Clause - Original understanding, Commerce Clause - Early years 1824-1935, Commerce Clause - New Deal, Commerce Clause - Civil rights, Commerce Clause - The Rehnquist Court

Read more here: » Commerce Clause: Encyclopedia II - Commerce Clause - History

In 1988 Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, a statute requiring the states to negotiate with Indian tribes to create compacts governing Indian Gaming. The statute provided that if a state failed to enter into such negotiations, or to negotiate in good faith, the Tribes could sue the state in federal court in order to compel the states to negotiate. If the states still refused, the statute provided that the matter would ultimately be refered to the Secretary of the Interior. Congress had asserted its power under the part of the Commerce Clause relating to commerce with Indians to pass such a statute, abrogating the ...

See also:

Seminole Tribe v. Florida, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Facts, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Issue, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Result, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Dissents, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - External link

Read more here: » Seminole Tribe v. Florida: Encyclopedia II - Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Facts

Justice Souter wrote a lengthy dissent in which he was joined by Justices Ginsburg and Breyer. Souter's dissent focuses on the language of the Eleventh Amendment, which only appears to eliminate diversity jurisdiction between states and citizens of other states. He rejects the "critical errors" in Hans, which had read common law sovereign immunity to extend the jurisdictional bar of the Eleventh Amendment to suits between states and their own citizens. Souter discounts the importance of the common law in interpreting the ...

See also:

Seminole Tribe v. Florida, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Facts, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Issue, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Result, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Dissents, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - External link

Read more here: » Seminole Tribe v. Florida: Encyclopedia II - Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Dissents

The Court, in an opinion by Chief Justice Rehnquist, struck down this abrogation as unconstitutional, and further held that the doctrine of Ex parte Young does not apply in this situation. The Court began by repudiating the precedential value of Union Gas, noting that there was no single majority rationale, and characterizing it as a major departure from the 19th century case of Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890), which had established the modern doctrine of sovereign immunity. The Court suggested that allowing ...

See also:

Seminole Tribe v. Florida, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Facts, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Issue, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Result, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Dissents, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - External link

Read more here: » Seminole Tribe v. Florida: Encyclopedia II - Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Result

Decades earlier, in Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445 (1976), the Court had held that Congress can abrogate state sovereign immunity pursuant to its powers under the Fourteenth Amendment, which clearly contemplates limiting the power of the states. In Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Company, 491 U.S. 1 (1989), the Court had held that Congress could also abrogate sovereign immunity under the Commerce Clause - but there was no majority in that decision. Justice Brennan was joined by three other justices in asserting that the Eleventh ...

See also:

Seminole Tribe v. Florida, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Facts, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Issue, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Result, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Dissents, Seminole Tribe v. Florida - External link

Read more here: » Seminole Tribe v. Florida: Encyclopedia II - Seminole Tribe v. Florida - Issue

The use of the Commerce Clause by Congress to justify its legislative power has been the subject of long, intense political controversy. Interpretation of the sixteen words of the Commerce Clause has helped define the balance of power between the federal government and individual states. As such, it has a direct impact on the lives of US citizens. According to the Tenth Amendment, the federal government of the United States only has the power to regulate matters specifically delegated to it by the Constitution. Other powers are reserv ...

See also:

Commerce Clause, Commerce Clause - Significance, Commerce Clause - History, Commerce Clause - Original understanding, Commerce Clause - Early years 1824-1935, Commerce Clause - New Deal, Commerce Clause - Civil rights, Commerce Clause - The Rehnquist Court

Read more here: » Commerce Clause: Encyclopedia II - Commerce Clause - Significance