Opinion ID: 3051722
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Applicability of Ex parte Young

Text: [9] As its last resort, the Venture contends that the strictures of the Eleventh Amendment may be avoided by viewing its suit as one seeking injunctive relief against state officers to force them to adhere to the Constitution, as in Ex Parte Young. The applicability of the Ex parte Young exception turns on whether federal takings actions are properly characterized as seeking prospective or retrospective relief. A remedy for past injury, even if it purports to be an injunction against state officers requiring the future payment of money, is barred because relief “inevitably come[s] from the general revenues of the State . . . , and thus . . . resembles far more closely [a] monetary award against the State itself,” which is forbidden under the Eleventh Amendment. Edelman, 415 U.S. at 665. “In determining whether the doctrine of Ex parte Young avoids an Eleventh Amendment bar to suit, a court need conduct only a ‘straightforward inquiry into whether the complaint [1)] alleges an ongoing violation of federal law and [2)] seeks relief properly characterized as prospective.’ ” Verizon Md., Inc. v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 535 U.S. 635, 645 (2002) (alteration omitted) (quoting Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene 8 The Venture does not contend that the Montana state courts have failed to provide adequate procedures to adjudicate its just compensation claim. 4172 SEVEN UP PETE VENTURE v. SCHWEITZER Tribe, 521 U.S. 261, 296 (1997) (O’Connor, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment)). [10] It is impossible to characterize the relief sought by the Venture as prospective. A reverse condemnation action seeks, “in a strict sense[,] . . . not just compensation per se but rather damages for the unconstitutional denial of such compensation.” Del Monte Dunes, 526 U.S. at 710. From a remedial perspective, then, “just compensation” is on all fours with traditional monetary damages, which are the quintessential form of retrospective relief. Thus, reverse condemnation actions cannot qualify as claims for prospective relief, and Ex parte Young consequently does not apply.