Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-404_i5ea.pdf
Page Number: 13

10 

UNITED STATES v. WASHINGTON 

Opinion of the Court 

unless Congress clearly and unambiguously waives it.  See 
Goodyear Atomic, 486 U. S., at 180.  The fact that Congress
more  explicitly  preserved  the  immunity  in  other  contexts 
does not mean that Congress clearly waived it here.  Nor 
does  the  lack  of  an  explicit  antidiscrimination  reference 
convert an ambiguous statutory waiver into one that unam-
biguously authorizes discrimination.  Indeed, Washington
points to no waiver statute that courts have interpreted as 
permitting  the  kind  of  explicit  discrimination  that  Wash-
ington’s  law  contains.  Given  that  broader  context,  Con-
gress’  explicit  antidiscrimination  language  in  the  tax  and 
environmental waivers as much suggests Congress’ general
hesitation to allow discrimination as it suggests that Con-
gress authorized it here.

Finally, Washington seeks support from our decision in 
Goodyear  Atomic.  The  issue  in  that  case,  however,  con-
cerned the  scope of the phrase “ ‘workmen’s compensation
laws’ ”  in  §3172’s  substantively-identical  predecessor  stat-
ute.  See 486 U. S., at 183.  Specifically, the question was 
whether that phrase encompassed state laws that permit-
ted “supplemental” workers’ compensation awards or only
state  laws  that  permitted  “standard”  awards.  Ibid.  We 
held that the phrase encompassed laws permitting supple-
mental awards.  See ibid. (stating that the statute “places
no express limitation on the type of workers’ compensation
scheme that is authorized”).  But in doing so, we said noth-
ing about laws that explicitly discriminate against the Fed-
eral Government.  Rather, we wrote that, “[o]n its face,” the
waiver  statute  “compels  the  same  workers’  compensation 
award for an employee injured at a federally owned facility
as the employee would receive if working for a wholly pri-
vate facility.”  Id., at 183–184.  We added that it was “clear” 
from the statute’s text “that Congress intended” state work-
ers’ compensation laws “to apply to federal facilities ‘to the 
same extent’ that they apply to private facilities within the
Id.,  at  185.  These  statements  from  Goodyear 
State.”