The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-05-30
4 state sued by Her Own Citizens


A State Sued by Her Own Citizens
We cannot refrain from saying few
words on the subject Of the right Of csti
zen Of any one OF the United States to sue
that State IN the Federal courts. Nobody
Chains that he can sue her 10 state court
without her own consent. But Jadgt
Huonrs has decided that he may sue hei
IN the Federal courts. We cannot think
Il possible that this decision can stand.
Before the eleventh article Of amend
meuts to the Federal Constitution was
ratified, the constitutional provision on the
subject read as follows:
Article III, Section IT,, paragraph |:
"Thc judicial power tof the United Stafesl
shall extend TO controversies between
two or more States; between State and
citizens Of another State; between citizens
Of different States; between citizens OF the
same State claiming lands under grants OF
different States; and between state, OF
The citizens thereof, aud foreign States,
citizens, or subjects"
lisa clear case that there is no power
granted therein which would enable citi-
zen 10 sue bis own State. On the contrary,
the fact that the above section grants the
power 20 a citizen OF "dRoiher State" to
sue Virginia negatives the supposition that
a citizen OF Virginia could under that sec
ton have sued his own State.
Again That section empowers one citi-
zen OF Virginia TO sue another citizen OF
Virginia ia .he Federal courts only in the
event that the two citizens "claim lands
under grants of different States" This is
the only case in which we could sue Judge
HuGHEs in Federal court. according to
the section above quoted; yet he holds
that we could sue the Commonwealth OF
Virginia In the Federal courts under that
section. Can this be constitutional law ?
Did the ratification OK the eleventh
amendment change this state Of things?
Let us read that amendment. II provides:
"The judicial power Of the United States
shall not be construed to extend to any
suit in law or equity commenced or prose-
cuied against one OF the United States by
citizens OF another State, or by citizens or
subjects OF any foreign State"
Before that amendment was ratified citi-
zens OF other States could sue Virginia,
but, we repeat, citizens OF Virginia could
not sue Virginia. Is there any language
in that amendment which changes the
Constitution so as to confer upon citizens
OF Virginia any right which they did not
have befores Not word. The only
change Is to put citizens OF other States
on the same footing with citizens Of Vir-
ginia. Tn the absence Of any other pro-
vision in the Constitution on the subject,
the eleventh amendment might have been
so construed as to give by implication, not
in terms, to the citizens OF any State the
right to sue that State; but this construc-
ton cannot be maintained in the face oil
the facts above recited, nor Ia the presence
OF the tenth amendment, which reads as
follows:
"The powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved
to the States respectively, or to the peo-
ple."
No power is delegated to the United
States to pass law authorizing States to
be sued in the Federal courts by her own
citizens. Consequently, any such law is
unconstitutional-th is. if there be any
such law.
Again: Article ILL.,, section IL, paragraph
2, provides as follows:
In all cases in which State
shall be party the Supreme Court shall
have original Jurisdiction"
So that If Judge HUGHES is right, the
Supreme Court OF the United States has
original Jurisdiction in all the ten thousand
petty cases that may grow out OF the le2is-
lation OF Virginia on the subject OF her
own debt!