Skip Navigation


Publius: The Journal of Federalism Advance Access originally published online on May 3, 2006
Publius: The Journal of Federalism 2006 36(3):393-420; doi:10.1093/publius/pjj025
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
36/3/393    most recent
pjj025v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bosworth, M. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of CSF Associates: Publius, Inc. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

"An Innate Sense of Fairness": State Responses to the U.S. Supreme Court's Sovereign Immunity Decisions

Matthew H. Bosworth*
* Winona State University

The U.S. Supreme Court's recent revival of state sovereign immunity is usually cited as a significant development in modern U.S. federalism. These decisions giving states a powerful defense against lawsuits lead to the question: How will the states react to the Court's rulings? How likely is it that states will consent to be sued? This article discusses the consequences of the Court's sovereign immunity rulings specifically concerning state legislative debates over immunity waiver bills. It explains why some states have been willing to waive immunity, despite the Court majority's fears of a flood of lawsuits if states did not enjoy immunity.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.