A Seminole Dissent?

8 Pages Posted: 21 Aug 2006

See all articles by John C. Eastman

John C. Eastman

Claremont Institute Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence


This article, part of a symposium on the Rehnquist Court's 11th Amendment jurisprudence, contends that the Court's holding in Seminole Tribe v. Florida, is inconsistent with the original understanding of the 11th Amendment. While the 11th Amendment recognized state sovereignty, it did so only over areas where the states remained sovereign, not over areas that had been delegated to the national government. Properly understood, therefore, state sovereign immunity from suit in federal court applies only to the diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts, not the federal question jurisdiction.

Keywords: Eleventh Amendment, Sovereign Immunity, Seminole Tribe v. Florida, Federalism, Rehnquist Court

JEL Classification: H10, H11, H70, H77

Suggested Citation

Eastman, John C., A Seminole Dissent?. Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 1, pp. 29-35, 2002-2003, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=925494

John C. Eastman (Contact Author)

Claremont Institute Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence

1317 W. Foothill Blvd., Suite 120
Upland, CA 91786
United States
877-855-3330 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://https://www.claremont.org/center-for-constitutional-jurisprudence/

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics