This article is missing citations or needs footnotes. Please help add inline citations to guard against copyright violations and factual inaccuracies. (December 2007)

Chisholm v. Georgia
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued February 5, 1793 Decided February 18, 1793
Full case name	Alexander Chisholm, Executors v. Georgia
Citations	2 U.S. 419 (more) 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419; 1 L. Ed. 440; 1793 U.S. LEXIS 249
Prior history	Original action filed, U.S. Supreme Court, August, 1792
Subsequent history	None on record
Holding
Article III, Section 2's grant of federal jurisdiction over suits "between a State and Citizens of another State" abrogated the States' sovereign immunity recognized at common law, thus allowing a private individual to hale a State into federal court.
Court membership
Chief Justice John Jay Associate Justices James Wilson · William Cushing John Blair · James Iredell
Case opinions
Seriatim opinion	Cushing
Seriatim opinion	Blair
Seriatim opinion	Wilson
Seriatim opinion	Jay
Dissent	Iredell
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art. III; Judiciary Act of 1789
Superseded by
U.S. Const. amend. XI

Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419 (1793), is considered the first United States Supreme Court case of significance and impact. Given its date, there is little available legal precedent (particularly in American law). ^[1]

Contents 1 Background of the case 2 The Court’s decision 3 Subsequent developments 4 See also 5 References 6 External links

[edit] Background of the case

In 1792 in South Carolina, Alexander Chisholm, the executor of the estate of Robert Farquhar, attempted to sue the state of Georgia in the Supreme Court over payments due him for goods that Farquhar had supplied Georgia during the American Revolutionary War. United States Attorney General Edmund Randolph argued the case for the plaintiff before the Court. The defendant, Georgia, refused to appear, claiming that as a "sovereign" a state did not have to appear in court to hear a suit against it to which it did not consent.

[edit] The Court’s decision

In a 4 to 1 decision, the Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, with Chief Justice of the United States John Jay concurring with Justices Blair, Wilson, and Cushing, and Justice Iredell dissenting. (In that time, there was no “majority” opinion; from junior- to senior-most, the Justices individually delivered their opinions.) The Court argued that Article 3, Section 2, of the Constitution abrogated the States’ sovereign immunity and granted federal courts the affirmative power to hear disputes between private citizens and States.

[edit] Subsequent developments

Mostly because of Chisholm v. Georgia, the Eleventh Amendment was ratified in 1795, which removed federal jurisdiction in cases where citizens of one state or of foreign countries attempt to sue another state. However, citizens of one state or of foreign countries can still use the Federal courts if the state consents to be sued, or if Congress, pursuant to a valid exercise of Fourteenth Amendment remedial powers, abrogates the states’ immunity from suit. See, e.g., Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445 (1976).

[edit] See also

• List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 2

[edit] References

• Jean Edward Smith, John Marshall: Definer Of A Nation, New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1996.
• Jean Edward Smith, The Constitution And American Foreign Policy, St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company, 1989.
• William Anderson LaBach, The Supreme Court Fails Its First Test: Chisholm v. Georgia, Saarbrucken,Germany, VDM Verlag, 2009.

1. ^ 2 U.S. 419 (Full text of the decision at Findlaw.com)

[edit] External links

• Text of Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793) is available from:  · Enfacto · LII