Document: 377 U.S. 184 84 S.Ct. 1207 12 L.Ed.2d 233 R. B. PARDEN et al., Petitioners,v.TERMINAL RAILWAY OF the ALABAMA STATE DOCKS DEPARTMENT al. No. 157. Argued Feb. 26, 27, 1964. Decided May 18, Rehearing Denied June 22, See 1903. Al G. Rives, Birmingham, Ala., for petitioners. Willis C. Darby, Jr., Mobile, respondents. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion of Court. 1 The question in this case is whether a State that owns and operates railroad interstate commerce may successfully plead sovereign immunity federal-court suit brought against by its employee under Federal Employers' Liability Act. 2 Petitioners, citizens Alabama, F deral District Court Southern Alabama respondent Terminal Railway Docks Department. They alleged was 'common carrier * engaging between any several States' within terms Act, 45 U.S.C. §§ 51—60, sought damages Act personal injuries sustained while employed Railway. Respondent appearing specially, moved to dismiss action on ground an agency had not waived from suit. granted motion, Appeals Fifth Circuit affirmed, 311 F.2d 727. We certiorari, 375 810, 50, 11 47. reverse. 3 wholly owned operated through Department, has been since 1927. Consisting about 50 miles tracks area adjacent at it serves those docks industries situated vicinity, also interchange with privately companies. It performs services profit statutory authority authorizing operate 'as though were ordinary common carrier.' 1940 Code (recompiled 1958), Tit. 38, § 17.1 conducts substantial operations commerce. contracts working agreements various brotherhoods accordance Labor 151 seq.; maintains equipment conformity Safety Appliance complies reporting bookkeeping requirements Interstate Commerce Commission. thus undisputably 4 Petitioners contend consequently subject That statute provides '(e)very States shall be liable person suffering injury he such commerce,' '(u)nder chapter district court United *.' 51, 56. Respondents rely, as did lower courts dismissing action, immunity—the principle sued individual without consent. Although Eleventh Amendment applicable here, petitioners are Alabama,2 recognized unconsenting immune suits own well another state. Hans v. Louisiana, 134 1, 10 504, 33 L.Ed. 842; Duhne New Jersey, 251 311, 40 154, 64 280; Great Northern Life Ins. Co. Read, 322 47, 873, 875, 88 1121; Fitts McGhee, 172 516, 524, 19 269, 272, 43 535. Monaco Mississippi, 292 313, 54 745, 78 1282. Nor divested 'on mere one arising constitution or laws States.' supra, U.S., 10, S.Ct., 505; see 154; Smith Reeves, 178 436, 447—449, 20 919, 928—929, 44 1140; Ex parte York, 256 490, 497—498, 41 588, 589, 65 1057. But course waived; State's freedom consent does protect which consented. Clark Barnard, 108 447, 878, 882, 27 780; Gunter Atlantic Coast Line Co., 200 273, 284, 26 252, 256, 477; Petty Tennessee-Missouri Brid e Comm'n, 359 275, 79 785, 804. think consented present 5 'The Judicial power construed extend law equity, commenced prosecuted Citizens State, Subjects Foreign State.' 6 This distinctly unlike where contractual based state bond coupons, plaintiff invoke federa-question jurisdiction alleging impairment obligation contract.3 Such debt obligations precisely 'evil' both expanded doctrine directed.4 Here, first time Court, claim meets upon cause expressly created Congress. Two questions presented: (1) Did Congress enacting FELA intend these circumstances? (2) have do so, immunity? 7 Congress, making 'every' commerce, meant what said.5 congressional statutes regulating railroads apply they hardly novel proposition; twice clearly affirmed In California, 297 175, 56 421, 80 567, federal 2, 6, '(a)ny engaged railroad,' applied California's state-owned railroad. unanimously held did.6 rejecting argument 'the deemed inapplicable because specifically mention them,' said, equally pertinent here: 8 'No convicing reason advanced why persons property concerned should receive protection act whenever state, privately-owned carrier, brings itself sweep statute, all-embracing language afford protection.' 185, 425. 9 California Taylor, 353 553, 77 1037, 1034, seq., 'any railroad, Act,' same again unanimous, did.7 After noting 'federal railroads, their employees, consistently publicly railroads,' although 'none referred public being coverage,' 562, 1042, stated: fact chose phrase coverage indicates included it. fact, consistent pattern railway legislation preceded employ all-inclusive no suggestion included.' 564, 1043. As support proposition, relied three decisions involving precise presented instant case, all authorize despite immunity. Mathewes Port Utilities 32 913 (D.C.E.D.S.C.1929); Higginbotham Public Belt 192 La. 525, 188 So. 395 (1938); Maurice Cal.App.2d 270, 110 P.2d 706 (Cal.Dist.C.A.1941). Thus we could read differently here undermining basis our decision Taylor. perceive reading differently. least broad allembracing purpose less employees. If made judgment that, view dangers work difficulty recovering existing rules, workers provided right FELA, presume say, absence express provision contrary, intended exclude particular group benefits conferred To 'sovereign exception' into would result, moreover, remedy; mean injured employees but left class employees—those whose employers happen owned—without effective means enforcing liability. unwilling conclude so pointless frustrating result. therefore carriers commerce.8 13 power, doctrine, disagree. enacted exercise constitutional regulate Second Cases, 223 169, 327. While citizen said rooted inherent nature sovereignty,' 875,9 surrendered portion sovereignty when 14 'This like others vested congress, complete itself, exercised utmost extent, acknowledges limitations other than prescribed constitution. If, always understood, limited specified objects plenary objects, over foreign nations, among States, congress absolutely single government, having restrictions found Gibbons Ogden, Wheat. 196—197, 23. 15 Thus, 184—185, 424, operation 16 'must subordination national government. states necessarily diminished extent grants government Constitution. (T)here limitation (as there tax instrumentalities). can more deny if authorized individual.' 17 By empowering then, stand way regulation. Since imposition regulatory must follow application cannot precluded immunity.10 18 Recognition render suable embodied respect extended overridden. remains Our conclusion simply began approximately years after enactment adopting ratifying Clause, empowered create railroads; FE LA conditioned amenability Act; thereafter operating taken accepted condition '(B)y rail, (the State) subjected violation 424; 568, 1045. agree '(T)he liable, theory 'It strange situation, indeed, (Federal Act) thereof, yet thereby subjecting act, out general rule consent.' Cal.App.2d, 277, P.2d, 710—711. 21 Accord, 550—551, 395, 403; supra.11 22 Alabama's constituted argue effect law, waive know waiver Reliance placed Constitution 1901, Art. I, Section never defendant equity'; cases holding neither legislature nor officer immunity;12 depends intention only. Chandler Dix, 194 590, 24 766, 48 1129; Palmer Ohio, 248 32, 39 16, 63 108; Ford Motor Department Treasury, 323 459, 466—470, 347, 351—352, 89 389. inapposite asserted arise commission attached More situation Bridge supra. bi-state pursuant Compact Clause assumed arguendo considered themselves, nevertheless compact proviso approving it,13 might otherwise had. reaching rejected arguments, proposition constitute was, held, law. true inclusion sanctioned compacts only instance done realm regulation; meaningless intention, conclusively shake off condition. Where sphere sphere—whether commerce—subject Government, constitutes Petty, venturing 'assume conditions attached.' 281—282, 790. 23 maintained accord sense Nation's federalism. A fully subsequent leaves exclusively enters activities regulation, subjects regulation private corporation. Cf. South Carolina 199 437, 463, 110, 117, 261; York 326 572, 66 310, 90 326. surprise citizens, think, learn petitioners, who purposes footing workers,14 denied benefit happens rather even surprising make 'liable' but, unfortunately, liability enforced. Moreover, result bear seeds impediment efficient entered entering numerous forms activity which, carried corporation, 454—455, 113—114. significant increasing number instances, takes form authorization lawsuits parties. preclude remove important weapon arsenal volume regulable conduct. Where, given indication desires hindered nothing obstruct will. Reversed. 25 WHITE, whom DOUGLAS, HARLAN, STEWART join, dissenting. I permit engage transportation business business. determine allowing conduct undertaken body legally directly resulting inimical put option either foregoing participation consenting legal responsibility caused thereby. However, impose courts. majority today follows Court's holdings constitutionally States. easily inferred legislating article Constitution, automatic compulsory rights another. Only problem declared undertakes will disallow invocation defense. Particular deference accorded 'old well-known divest pre-existing privileges words effect,' Mine Workers, 330 258, 67 677, 686, 91 884, find origin Far manifesting unequivocal determination, legislative history consider possible impact suits. expressed 'to change common-law employers.'1 Certain specific defenses available employer employee's removed, them. require defense yield claimed inconsistency provisions commerce' relegates immunity, mentioned level defenses, four proscribed. decent normally preferred position dictates decides control forfeiture appear unmistakable clarity. 28 previous opinions indicated stated most language, overwhelming implication text leave room reasonable construction.' Murray Wilson Distilling 213 151, 171, 29 458, 464, 53 742. otor 468—470, 352—353, consequence Congress' failure bring home makes impossible 'intentional relinquishment abandonment known privilege' shown before waived. Johnson Zerbst, 304 58 1019, 1023, 82 1461; Fay Noia, 372 391, 83 822, 837. holds regard privilege need knowing intelligent.2 Preferring limiting conditions, respectfully dissent. Ala.Const. amendment 116; Ala. 45(14), (16). provides: Of cited federal-question asserted, 1140, 1057, commonplace give rise merely lurked background. former tax-refund receivers corporation latter admiralty damage due negligence. 280, restrain Eighteenth invalid. Cohens Virginia, 264, 406—407, 257; 12—13, 506 507, Federalist, 81 (Hamilton) (Cooke ed. 1961), 548—549; Irish Prothro, Politics American Democracy, 123 (1959), quoted 276, n. 787, 804; Jaffe, Suits Against Governments Officers: Sovereign Immunity, Harv.L.Rev. (1963). clear enough, further desire cover rail covered history, House Report bill relates scope regulative extends.' H.R.Rep. 1386, Accompany H.R.20310, 60th Cong., 1st Sess. (1908). recover penalty members National Railroad Adjustment Board compel them take open, 1046, bar award 'shall concurrent contention suit, 'concurrent' similarly limited. 18—19, 508; Chisholm Georgia, Dall, 419, 440; Dakota North Carolina, 286, 318, 448. clear, however, limit courts, provide alternative forum O'Donnell Elgin, J. & E.R. 193 348, 352—353 (C.A.7th Cir. 1951), cert. denied, 343 956, 72 1051, 96 1356; Trapp Baltimore O.R. 283 F. 655 (D.C.N.D.Ohio 1922); Waltz Chesapeake F.Supp. (D.C.N.D.Ill.1946). 548, 13, 506. Compare note 4, Harv.L.Rev., 3, 18. withdraw commerce.' 582, 314, (opinion Frankfurter, J.). 'directly strip citizen,' hence Howard Illinois Central 207 502—503, 141, 147, 52 297, Frost Trucking Comm'n 271 583, 46 605, 70 1101. Howard, unconstitutional intrastate embraces engages submits his concerns Congress.' 502, 147. Frost, converted command, carrier's use highways. Both distinguishable imposed fall outside valid statute's described attempt 'power delegated Constitution; words, legislate concerning matters purely concern,' applied, real using them.' 591, 606. contrast, authority, FELA; imposing requiring submit attempting it, prevent unjustifiably excepted. causes voluntarily submitted power. Dunn Construction Adjustment, 234 372, 376, 175 383, 386 (1937); Tax Commercial Realty 236 358, 361, 182 31, 35 (1938). 'nothing herein contained affect, impair, diminish right, ver navigable waters reserving Jones navigation 281, 789. reliance congressionally sufficient refute respondents' immunity,' suability 11, presumably just falling Yet enter compact. Similarly, An explicitly recognizes providing follows: 'Employees statement, oral written, accident, company is, involved, (an) representative railway, permission, (e)xcept 'an relating certain cases." exception required 60. Asked counsel indicate face p. inadvertently regulations used carrier. Nevertheless, presence Railway's books illustrates, incongruity considering similar every material respect. Sess., debate floor Representative Henry summarized 'changed rules law.' 42 Cong.Rec. 4427. inapposite. waiver, declaring 'sue sued.' Taylor plaintiffs' claims Though disclaimed deciding issue. Footnote states: First (p), us facts case.' 1046. And long Texas, 143 621, 488, 36 285.

Category: 7