Cynthia Holcomb Hall

“ The Supreme Court has recognized that the Ex parte Young doctrine is necessary "to permit federal courts to vindicate federal rights and hold state officials responsible to 'the supreme authority of the United States.'" Pennhurst, 465 U.S. at 105 (quoting Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. at 160) ) . This purpose would be undermined if state officials were not required to act consistently with federal statutes, as well as the federal constitution. Almond Hill, 768 F.2d at 1034. Consequently, the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity applies to violations of federal statutory rights. ”

“ Congress may choose to limit the availability of an Ex parte Young suit against state officers for violations of federal statutory law, and the Court found that Congress intended to do so when it enacted the statute at issue in Seminole Tribe. ”

“ We find only that Congress did not intend that result in the [IGRA] ." Id. The Court then contrasted the IGRA to those statutes "where lower courts have found that Congress implicitly authorized suit under Ex parte Young," such as the Clean Water Act. Id.
When Congress enacted the Clean Water Act citizen suit provision, it specified that it was legislating to the extent permitted by the Eleventh Amendment. [2] Congress intended to encourage and assist the public to participate in enforcing the standards promulgated to reduce water pollution. ”