0

In United States v. Georgia the U.S. Supreme Court held that Title II of the ADA validly abrogrates sovereign immunity under the 11th Amendment. A Title II Plaintiff may name a state or one of its agencies directly when using this cause of action. It strikes me that this could be a plausible vehicle into the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (although one still needs to move for leave to file within the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction). My question is:

Assume a plaintiff (validly) names a state as a defendant in a complaint/petition and that said pleading validly joins other non-state parties and claims. Further assume the U.S. Supreme Court grants leave to file this case in its original jurisdiction. Would the defendant(s) be able to obtain a dismissal for want of jurisdiction if either of the following events later occurred?

1.) Plaintiff files an amended complaint that removes the state as a defendant.

2.) Defendants file and prevail on a motion to dismiss the state as a defendant for failure to state a claim.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.