Ex parte Young

E115612

United States Supreme Court case federal courts doctrine landmark decision

Ex parte Young is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court decision that created a legal fiction allowing suits in federal court against state officials to stop ongoing violations of federal law, despite state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

All labels observed (3)

Label	Occurrences
Ex parte Young canonical	3
Ex parte Young doctrine	3
Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908)	1

Statements (46)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ federal courts doctrine ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ
appliesTo	state officials sued in their official capacity ⓘ
citation	209 U.S. 123 ⓘ
citationStyle	Ex parte Young self-linksurface differs ⓘ surface form: Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908)
constitutionalBasis	Supremacy of federal law over conflicting state law ⓘ
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	1908 ⓘ
doctrineCreated	Ex parte Young self-linksurface differs ⓘ surface form: Ex parte Young doctrine
doesNotApplyTo	suits directly against the state ⓘ suits seeking retroactive monetary relief from the state treasury ⓘ
effectOnLaw	limited scope of state sovereign immunity in federal court ⓘ provides primary mechanism for suing state officials for ongoing violations of federal law ⓘ
enforcementContext	enforcement of federal constitutional rights ⓘ enforcement of federal statutes against state officials ⓘ
excludesRemedyType	retroactive monetary damages from the state treasury ⓘ
holding	federal courts may grant prospective injunctive relief against state officials to stop ongoing violations of federal law ⓘ the Eleventh Amendment does not bar suits in federal court against state officials in their official capacity for prospective relief ⓘ
impact	enables federal courts to enjoin unconstitutional state action despite sovereign immunity ⓘ
jurisdiction	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
legalFiction	state officer enforcing unconstitutional law is treated as an individual, not as the state ⓘ
legalIssue	Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ surface form: Eleventh Amendment federal question jurisdiction ⓘ injunctive relief against state officials ⓘ state sovereign immunity ⓘ
originatingState	Minnesota ⓘ
party	Edward T. Young ⓘ
partyRole	Attorney General of Minnesota ⓘ
principle	a suit to enjoin a state official from enforcing an unconstitutional statute is not a suit against the state ⓘ state officials acting unconstitutionally are stripped of their official or representative character ⓘ
relatedAreaOfLaw	civil rights litigation ⓘ constitutional law ⓘ federal courts ⓘ
relatedCase	Edelman v. Jordan ⓘ Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman ⓘ Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida ⓘ Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland ⓘ
relatedConstitutionalProvision	Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ Supremacy Clause ⓘ
remedyType	declaratory relief ⓘ prospective injunctive relief ⓘ
status	good law as of 2024 ⓘ
subjectMatter	challenge to Minnesota railroad rate regulations ⓘ
usedIn	Section 1983 litigation ⓘ federal court challenges to state statutes ⓘ

Referenced by (7)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution → keyCase → Ex parte Young ⓘ

Hans v. Louisiana → isCitedBy → Ex parte Young ⓘ

Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida → relatedDoctrine → Ex parte Young ⓘ

this entity surface form: Ex parte Young doctrine

United States sovereign immunity law → includesDoctrine → Ex parte Young ⓘ

this entity surface form: Ex parte Young doctrine

United States sovereign immunity law → keyCase → Ex parte Young ⓘ

Ex parte Young → doctrineCreated → Ex parte Young self-linksurface differs ⓘ

this entity surface form: Ex parte Young doctrine

Ex parte Young → citationStyle → Ex parte Young self-linksurface differs ⓘ

this entity surface form: Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908)