William J. Brennan, Jr.

“ I would hold that both Territories and territorial officers acting in their official capacities are "persons" within the meaning of § 1983 and that Guam has no sovereign immunity from suits in federal court under federal law. ”

“ Some legislators drew an explicit linkage between the Civil Rights Act and violence in the Territories, characterizing opponents of the legislation as " [t] he same men [who] were wont to ridicule 'bleeding Kansas.' " Id., at 414 (remarks of Rep. Roberts) . Others emphasized the importance of extending to "every individual citizen of the Republic in every State and Territory of the Union . . . the extent of the rights guarantied to him by the Constitution." ”

“ Neither is my conclusion that Territories are "persons" under § 1983 undermined by the 1874 recodification of the Dictionary Act, which altered the definition of "person" by replacing the phrase "bodies politic and corporate" with "partnerships and corporations." 1 Revision of the United States Statutes as Drafted 19 (1872) (hereinafter Draft) . The Court suggests that Congress clarified the definition of "person" in the Dictionary Act to exclude Territories even while at the same time making clear that § 1983 covered civil rights abuses in the Territories. ”

“ The Territories Clause provides without qualification that " [t] he Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States." U.S.C.onst., Art. IV, § 3, cl. 2. An unincorporated Territory "exists at the behest of Congress. By a simple vote of the Congress, the Organic Act under which the unincorporated territory exists may be repealed and the limited self government which it enjoys nullified." ”

“ Respondents contend that the 1959 amendment provides the only exceptions to an otherwise universally applicable sovereign immunity bestowed by the Organic Act itself.↑ Congressional supremacy, however, does not support the Court of Appeals' conclusion that Guam is outside the coverage of § 1983 because it is an instrumentality of the Federal Government. Under the Court of Appeals' approach, even a natural person acting under color of Guam law would be beyond the scope of § 1983-a result flatly inconsistent with any view of the statute. ”

“ Into Kansas thronged Southern and Northern zealots, brawlers, adventurers, and land jobbers. From New England, financed by Boston money, moved Abolitionist immigrants who were led by their ministers but who also brought their rifles with them. ”

“ Brief for Government of Virgin Islands as Amicus Curiae 8. [10] "The Government of a State does not derive its powers from the United States, while the Government of [a Territory] owes its existence wholly to the United States. . . . The jurisdiction and authority of the United States over that [T] erritory and its inhabitants, for all legitimate purposes of government, is paramount." Grafton v. United States, 206 U.S. 333, 354, 27 S.Ct. 749, 755, 51 L.Ed. 1084 (1907) . Congress has "entire dominion and sovereignty" and "full legislative power" over the Territories. ”

“ Although the recodification eliminated the reference to "body politic," this change did not exclude Territories from the scope of § 1983 because the recodification also provided that "the word 'person' may extend and be applied to partnerships and corporations," id., at 19 (emphasis added) . At the time of the revision the term "corporation" generally was thought to include political entities such as a Territory. See Cong.Globe, 39th Cong., 2d Sess., 451 (1867) (remarks of Rep. Bingham) (referring to the Territory of Nebraska as "a corporation") . ”

“ Proponents of the measure stressed the important role the Federal Government had played in curbing the prewar spread of slavery in the Territories. See, e.g., Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 335 (1871) (remarks of Rep. Hoar) (" [T] he great Northwest was saved from slavery by the national power. . . . If it had not been for the benignant interposition of the national authority against the local desire to establish despotism, those great States of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin would have been today slave-holding States") . ”