Magna Carta, and Other AddressesGuthrie, William D. (William Dameron)
History
Magna Carta, and Other Addresses
Guthrie, William D. (William Dameron)
Constitutional law -- United States
The failure to prohibit suits against officers of a state must,
therefore, have been intentional. Indeed, it is highly improbable that
any one at the time conceived that the language adopted was broad
enough to prohibit suits against officers of a state. On the contrary,
it is proper to assume that the framers of the eleventh amendment did
not intend to permit an officer of a state, while acting under the
color or excuse of an unconstitutional state statute, to invade or
deny any right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States,
or that such a state officer should be immune from suit in a court of
the United States merely because he was acting in a representative
capacity as an agent of the state. The courts of the United States were
specially charged with the preservation of the Constitution, so far,
indeed, as it can be preserved by judicial authority. The "Federalist"
shows how clearly it was contemplated that the federal courts were to
have power to overrule state statutes in manifest contravention of the
Constitution. If state officers were withdrawn from the jurisdiction
of the national courts, their oath to support the Constitution of the
United States might become a mere empty ceremony of no enforceable
obligation or sanction. If officers of a state could not be sued in
equity in a federal court in an action to enjoin the enforcement
of unconstitutional state statutes, many of the provisions of the
Constitution, of equal authority with the eleventh amendment, might
not be effectually enforceable except by the grace of the states.
The prohibitions against the states, which existed when the eleventh
amendment was adopted, such as that no state shall emit bills of
credit, or make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment
of debts, or pass any bill of attainder, or any ex post facto law,
or any law impairing the obligation of contracts, or lay imposts or
duties on imports or exports, might to a great extent be nullified
and rendered practically ineffective, if officers of a state could
not be sued in a federal court. Indeed, the thirteenth, fourteenth
and fifteenth amendments would be deprived of a great part of their
intended effect if state officers enforcing unconstitutional state laws
and clothed with the power of the state could not be sued and enjoined
in a federal court.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account