Hans v. Louisiana
Supreme Court of the United States Official seal of the Supreme Court of the United States File links The following pages link to this file: Marbury v. ...
Argued --- Decided ---
Full case name: --- Citations: 134 U.S. 1 Prior history: --- Subsequent history: ---
Holding
---
Court membership
Chief Justice --- Associate Justices ---
Case opinions
Majority by: --- Joined by: --- Concurrance in the judgment by: --- Dissent by: --- Joined by: ---
Laws applied
---

Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court determining that the El eventh Amendment prohibits a state from being sued in a federal court by one of its own citizens. Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... 1890 was a common year starting on Wednesday (see link for calendar). ... The Supreme Court Building, Washington, D.C. The Supreme Court Building, Washington, D.C., (large image) The Supreme Court of the United States, located in Washington, D.C., is the highest court (see supreme court) in the United States; that is, it has ultimate judicial authority within the United States... Amendment XI (the Eleventh Amendment) of the United States Constitution was passed by the US Congress on March 4, 1794 and was ratified on February 7, 1795. ... The term federal court, when used by itself, can refer to: Any court of the national government in a country that has a federal system such as that of the United States (United States federal courts) or Mexico In some countries, a particular court, for example, the Federal Court of...

Facts

The plaintiff, Hans, was a citizen of the state of Louisiana. Hans owned bonds issued by the state, and was concerned that a re c ent change to the state constitution would rended the bonds invalid. Hans filed a suit against the state in the United States District Court, asserting that Louisiana was impairing the obligations of a contract, which was forbidden by Article I, Sec ti on 10 of the United States Constitution. A plaintiff, also known as a claimant, or a complainant is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an action) before a court. ... State nickname: Pelican State Other U.S. States Capital Baton Rouge Largest city New Orleans Governor Kathleen Blanco (D) Official languages None; English and French de facto Area 134,382 km² (31st)  - Land 112,927 km²  - Water 21,455 km² (16%) Population (2000)  - Population 4,468,976 (22nd)  - Density 39. ... Bonds can refer to: A financial bond (including a junk bond or a zero-coupon bond) Barry Bonds A chemical bond (including the ionic bond, covalent bond, coordinate covalent bond, metallic bond, hydrogen bond, Carbon-carbon bond, Disulfide bond and Glycosidic bond) This is a disambiguation page — a navigational aid... The United States district courts are the general trial courts of the United States federal court system. ... Page I of the Constitution of the United States of America Page II of the United States Constitution Page III of the United States Constitution Page IV of the United States Constitution The Syng inkstand, with which the Constitution was signed The Constitution of the United States is the supreme...

Issue

The question facing the Court was "whether a state can be sued in a Circuit Court of the United States by one of its own citizens upon a suggestion that the case is one that arises under the Const itution or laws of the United States." The Court noted that the Constitution does not specifically provide for federal jurisdiction in suits between a citizen and a state, but Article III does give the federal cour ts jurisdiction over "all cases" arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States. Here, Hans was asserting a violation of the Constitution as his cause of action. Article Three of the United States Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the federal (national) government. ...

Furthermore, the Court was well aware that nearly a century before the Supreme Co urt decision in Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793), holding that states could be sued in federal courts by citizens of other states, had sparked an immediate negative response from Congress and the states, through th e ratification of the Eleventh Amendment. That Amendment expressly forbade citizens of one state from suing another state, but said nothing about citizens suing their own state. Thus the Court was left to resolve the issue of whether such a suit was therefore allowed. Holding States were not immune from lawsuits by individuals due to the grant to the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over them by Article III of the Constitution. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... 1793 was a common year starting on Tuesday (see link for calendar). ... Amendment XI (the Eleventh Amendment) of the United States Constitution was passed by the US Congress on March 4, 1794 and was ratified on February 7, 1795. ...

Result

Justice Joseph Bradley, writing for the Court, first examined the discussions surrounding the ratification of the Constitution. He noted that Alexander Hamilton had wri tten a passage in the Federalist Papers, #81, assuring his audience that the Constitution would not remove the states' traditional immunity from lawsuits. The Court then examined similar language in statements made by James Madison and John Mars hall in the Virginia convention held to ratify the Constitution. Both asserted that the federal power to hear claims brought by a state against a citizen of another state would not apply in the reverse, hence that one state could not be sued in fede ral court by citizens of another. Joseph Philo Bradley (March 14, 1813 – January 22, 1892), was an American jurist, best known for his service on the United States Supreme Court, and on the Electoral Commission that decided the disputed 1876 presidential election. ... A portrait of Alexander Hamilton by John Trumbull, 1792. ... Title page of an early Federalist compilation. ... James Madison (March 16, 1751 – June 28, 1836) was the fourth (1809–1817) President of the United States. ... State nickname: Old Dominion Other U.S. States Capital Richmond Largest city Virginia Beach Governor Mark R. Warner (D) Official languages English Area 110,862 km² (35th)  - Land 102,642 km²  - Water 8,220 km² (7. ...

The Court suggested that the framers of the Constitution had not addressed the possibility of a citizen suing his own state because such a thing would simply be inconceivable to them. At the time the Constitution was wri tten, states had always been immune from such suits, unless the state itself consented to be sued. Furthermore, the Judiciary Acts of 1789 and 1802 had granted the federal courts jurisdiction "concurrent with the courts of the several s tates," indicating that Congress had not contemplated the possibility that the federal courts would have any powers unknown to the state courts. Consent (as a term of jurisprudence) is a possible justification against civil or criminal liability. ... Judiciary Act of 1789 The Judiciary Act of 1789 (1 Stat 73) established the entire federal judiciary, which initially consisted of a Supreme Court of six judges, 3 circuit courts, and 13 district courts. ... 1789 was a common year starting on Thursday (see link for calendar). ... 1802 was a common year starting on Friday (see link for calendar). ... In law, jurisdiction refers to the aspect of a any unique legal authority as being localized within boundaries. ... The Congress of the United States is the legislative branch of the federal government of the United States of America. ...

Finally, the Court noted the argument made by Justice Marshall in another case, that the Su preme Court could hear appeals of a state's successful suit against a citizen precisely because this was not the same thing as a citizen's suit against the state. Instead, Marshall compared them to suits against the United States, which were cl early forbidden at the time.

Harlan's concurrence

Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote a brief concurring opinion, agreeing with the outcome in the case, but asserting that the Court's criticism of the Chisholm case was misplaced. Harlan thought that Chisholm had been decided correctly, based on the language of the Constitution at the time of the decision. John Marshall Harlan John Marshall Harlan (June 1, 1833 – October 14, 1911) was an American Supreme Court associate justice. ...

Later developments

Much of the broad immunity from suit affirmed by this decision was eventually whittled away in later decisions. One set of decisions determined that a citizen could sue a state official to prevent that official from carrying out a state policy that was deemed unconstitutional. Another set found that the Fourteenth Ame ndment gave Congress the power to abrogate state immunity from suit to the extent that this was necessary to protect Constitutional rights. However, in the late 1990s, the Rehnquist court issued a series of decisons reinforcing state immunity from suit under the Eleventh Amendment. Amendment XIV (the Fourteenth Amendment) of the United States Constitution is one of the post-Civil War amendments and includes the due process and equal protection clauses (Section 1). ... The abrogation doctrine is a doctrine in United States constitutional law which permits the U.S. Congress to allow lawsuits seeking monetary damages against individual U.S. states, so long as this is usually done pursuant to a constitutional limitation on the power of the states. ... // Events and trends The 1990s are generally classified as having moved slightly away from the more conservative 1980s, but otherwise retaining the same mindset. ... William H. Rehnquist has served as the Chief Justice of the United States since 1986. ...

External link

• 134 U.S. 1 (Text of the opinion on Findlaw.com)