Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 6 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Calderon v. Ashmus.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Calderon v. Ashmus Anchor | green | “while the eleventh amendment is jurisdictional in the sense that it is a limitation on the federal court's judicial power, ... we have recognized that it is not coextensive with the limitations on judicial power in article iii.” | 3 |
| 2 | James W. Childs v. Margery B. Koosed, Richard L. Aynes, Isaac C. Hunt, William D. Rich, Frank Marini, and William v. Muse | green | “in view of the district court's disposition of the claims on eleventh amendment grounds, the district court was without jurisdiction to make the alternative ruling on the merits.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.