100 likes | 242 Views
11 th Amendment. Kourtney Strickland. U.S. History I. April 22 nd 2010. Passed & Ratified. New York, March 27, 1794 Rhode Island, March 31, 1794 Connecticut, May 8, 1794 New Hampshire, June 16, 1794 Massachusetts, June 26, 1794 Vermont, between October 9 and November 9, 1794
E N D
11th Amendment Kourtney Strickland U.S. History I April 22nd 2010
Passed & Ratified • New York, March 27, 1794 • Rhode Island, March 31, 1794 • Connecticut, May 8, 1794 • New Hampshire, June 16, 1794 • Massachusetts, June 26, 1794 • Vermont, between October 9 and November 9, 1794 • Virginia, November 18, 1794 • November 29, 1794 • Kentucky, December 7, 1794 • Maryland, December 26, 1794 • Delaware, January 23, 1795 • North Carolina, February 7, 1795 • South Carolina, December 4, 1797 The Eleventh Amendment was proposed by Congress on March 4, 1794 Ratification was completed on February 7, 1795 Official announcement of ratification was not made until January 8, 1798
11th Amendment • The Eleventh Amendment was adopted following the Supreme Court Case Chisholm v. Georgia. • The Eleventh Amendment reflects a principle of sovereign immunity • Eleventh Amendment immunizes states from suit for money damages or equitable relief without their consent The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
Facts… • Only 12th of the 15th states wished to have the 11th amendment ratified and South Carolina subsequently ratified the amendment. • New Jersey and Pennsylvania did not ratify this amendment.
Osborn v. Bank of the United States Chief Justice Marchall
Court Case • Through Chief Justice Marshall, held that the Bank of the U.S. could sue the Treasurer of ohio • because the plaintiff sought relief against a state officer rather than against the State itself. • This ruling embodied two principles, one of which has survived and one of which the Marshall Court itself soon abandoned. The latter holding was that a suit is not one against a State unless the State is a named party of record.
Court’s Opinion • It was okay for them to sue the treasurer of Ohio even if the 11th amendment stated they could not sue a state. But since it was a person named as the party instead of the state it was ok. • The court felt it was completely legally and that it was okay since it was not that state being sued. • Some thought it was unfair that they make this exception since it says u can not sue a state but they were suing a states main official.
Would you follow the courts decision and agree that it was completely legal and fair for them to sue a main official to abide by the 11th amendment? Do you believe there would be any reason to modify the 11th amendment to make its laws more firm and understandable? Do you think that the 11th amendment was followed in the Osborn vs Bank of the United States case?