Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-463_3ebh.pdf
Page Number: 17.0

12 

WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH v. JACKSON 

Opinion of the Court 
Opinion of GORSUCH, J. 

also  name  as  defendants  Stephen  Carlton,  Katherine 
Thomas, Allison Benz, and Cecile Young.  On the briefing 
and  argument  before  us,  it  appears  that  these  particular 
defendants fall within the scope of Ex parte Young’s historic 
exception to state sovereign immunity.  Each of these indi-
viduals is an executive licensing official who may or must 
take enforcement actions against the petitioners if they vi-
olate the terms of Texas’s Health and Safety Code, includ-
ing S. B. 8.  See, e.g., Tex. Occ. Code Ann. §164.055(a); Brief 
for Petitioners 33–34.  Accordingly, we hold that sovereign 
immunity  does  not  bar  the  petitioners’  suit  against  these 
named defendants at the motion to dismiss stage.3 
  JUSTICE  THOMAS  alone  reaches  a  different  conclusion.  
He  emphasizes  that  suits  seeking  equitable  relief  against 
executive officials are permissible only when supported by 
tradition.  See post, at 2–3 (opinion concurring in part and 
dissenting in  part).   He  further emphasizes that  the  rele-
vant  tradition  here,  embodied  in  Ex parte  Young,  permits 
equitable relief against only those officials who possess au-
thority to enforce a challenged state law.  Post, at 3–4.  We 
agree with  all  of  these principles; our disagreement is  re-
stricted to their application. 
  JUSTICE THOMAS suggests that the licensing-official de-
fendants lack authority to enforce S. B. 8 because that stat-
ute  says  it  is  to  be  “exclusively”  enforced  through  private 
civil  actions  “[n]otwithstanding  . . .  any  other  law.”    See 
Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. §171.207(a).  But the same 
provision of S. B. 8 also states that the law “may not be con-
strued to . . . limit the enforceability of any other laws that 
regulate or prohibit abortion.”  §171.207(b)(3).  This saving 
clause  is  significant  because,  as  best  we  can  tell  from  the 
briefing  before  us,  the  licensing-official  defendants  are 
—————— 

3 The petitioners may proceed against Ms. Young solely based on her 
authority to supervise licensing of abortion facilities and ambulatory sur-
gical centers, and not with respect to any other enforcement authority 
under Chapter 171 of the Texas Health and Safety Code.