Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

00-1531 Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland, et al.

By: dmc-admin//May 28, 2002//

00-1531 Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Maryland, et al.

By: dmc-admin//May 28, 2002//

Listen to this article

The doctrine of Ex parte Young permits Verizon’s suit to go forward against the state commissioners in their official capacities. The Court thus need not decide whether the Commission waived its immunity from suit by voluntarily participating in the regulatory regime established by the Act. In determining whether the Ex parte Young doctrine avoids an Eleventh Amendment bar to suit, a court need only conduct a “straightforward inquiry” into whether the complaint alleges an ongoing violation of federal law and seeks relief properly characterized as prospective. Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Tribe of Idaho, 521 U.S. 261, 296, 298-299. Here, Verizon’s prayer for injunctive relief – that state officials be restrained from enforcing an order in contravention of controlling federal law – clearly satisfies our “straightforward inquiry.” As for Verizon’s prayer for declaratory relief, even though Verizon seeks a declaration of the past, as well as the future, ineffectiveness of the Commission’s action, so that the private parties’ past financial liability may be affected, no past liability of the State, or of any of its commissioners, is at issue, see Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 668. The Fourth Circuit’s suggestion that the doctrine of Ex parte Young is inapplicable because the Commission’s order was probably not inconsistent with federal law is unavailing: The inquiry into whether suit lies under Ex parte Young does not include an analysis of the merits of the claim, see Coeur d’Alene, supra, at 281. Nor is there any merit to the Commission’s argument that sec. 252(e)(6) constitutes a detailed and exclusive remedial scheme like the one held in Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, 75, to implicitly exclude Ex parte Young actions.

240 F.3d 279, vacated and remanded.

Local effect:

The decision is consistent with current Seventh Circuit law, MCI v. Illinois Bell, 222 F.3d 323 (7th Cir. 2000).

Scalia, J., Kennedy, J., concurring; Souter, J., concurring; O’Connor, J., not participating.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests