Opinion ID: 161480
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Implicating special sovereignty interests

Text: 16 In response to the Supreme Court's decision in Coeur d'Alene, we recognized: [I]f we determine the relief Plaintiffs seek, although prospective and not tantamount to a damages award, is an excessive intrusion into an area of special state sovereign interest, Ex parte Young does not apply, and the Eleventh Amendment bars the suit. Elephant Butte, 160 F.3d at 611-12. The defendants argue that the present action invades special sovereignty interests. But we may easily dispense with this argument because, in J.B. ex rel. Hart v. Valdez, 186 F.3d 1280 (10th Cir. 1999), we held that a state's interest in administering a welfare program at least partially funded by the federal government is not such a core sovereign interest as to preclude the application of Ex parte Young. Id. at 1287. We also noted that a challenge to the administration of a welfare program is not the equivalent of a suit for money damages, nor does it strike at the state's fundamental power, such as the power to tax. Id. Moreover, one of the claims in Valdez involved an alleged violation of the Medicaid Act, the same statutory scheme at issue in the case before us. Because the plaintiffs in the present case are challenging the administration of New Mexico's Medicaid plan, we conclude it is analogous to Valdez and special sovereignty interests are not implicated.