In the 1979 case Nevada v. Hall, the Supreme Court declared that states can be haled into the courts of sister states without their consent. Now in their third visit to the Supreme Court, Gilbert Hyatt and the Franchise Tax Board of California are arguing over whether the Court should overturn this precedent.

Does Nevada v. Hall violate state sovereignty? Or is the sovereign immunity of the states abrogated by the Constitution and the Eleventh Amendment? Elbert Lin of Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP discusses state sovereign immunity and the competing interests of sovereign states in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt. Oral argument is January 9, 2019.

As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speaker.

Learn more about Elbert Lin:

Follow Elbert Lin on Twitter: @ElbertLin


Related Links & Differing Views:

National Association of Attorneys General: “State Sovereign Immunity”

Virginia Law Review: “Sovereign Immunity and the Constitutional Text”

The Federalist Society: “Should States Be Immune From Suit in Courts of Other States?”

Reason: “Interstate Sovereign Immunity and Why the Supreme Court Should Leave It Alone Right Now”

Brief of Professors of Federal Jurisdiction as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent