Opinion ID: 783445
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Immunity under the RCSBM

Text: 25 According to the RCSBM, The State Bar staff, the members of the district and standing committees and the members and staff of the Board of Law Examiners are absolutely immune from suit for conduct arising out of the performance of their duties. The district court cited this provision in its oral ruling finding defendants immune from this lawsuit. While this provision may immunize the individual defendants from state law claims, no state law or rule can immunize anyone from liability for violating the United States Constitution. In Ex parte Young, the Supreme Court explained the supremacy of federal law over state law: 26 If the act which the state attorney general seeks to enforce be a violation of the Federal Constitution, the officer, in proceeding under such enactment, comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The state has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States. 27 209 U.S. 123, 159-60, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908). 28 Therefore, the RCSBM do not immunize any defendant from this § 1983 lawsuit alleging ongoing violations of federal law.