## Facts

- Paul Lapides, a professor in Georgia’s state university system, sued the Board of Regents and university officials in Georgia state court.
- He alleged that officials placed sexual-harassment accusations in his personnel file, asserting Georgia tort claims and claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- Georgia removed the case to federal court and then moved to dismiss, arguing it retained Eleventh Amendment immunity in federal court even though state law had waived sovereign immunity for the relevant state-law claims in Georgia courts.
- The federal district court held Georgia waived Eleventh Amendment immunity by removing the action.
- The Eleventh Circuit reversed, reasoning that uncertainty in state law about the attorney general’s authority meant Georgia could still assert immunity after removal.

## Issues

1. Whether a State that has waived immunity in its own courts for certain state-law claims waives Eleventh Amendment immunity for those claims by voluntarily removing the case to federal court.
2. Whether state-law limits on a state official’s authority to waive immunity prevent a waiver based on the State’s litigation conduct in removing the case.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court unanimously reversed and remanded.
- The Court held that, in the context presented, a State waives its Eleventh Amendment immunity when it removes a case from state court to federal court.
- The Court limited the holding to state-law claims for which the State has already waived immunity from suit in its own courts.
- The Court rejected the view that uncertainty in state law about who may waive immunity preserves Eleventh Amendment immunity after removal, treating waiver by removal as governed by federal law.
- The Court noted the § 1983 claim did not supply a valid claim against the State, but the remaining state-law claims were still pending in federal court, keeping the immunity question live.

## Legal Principles

- A State’s voluntary invocation of federal jurisdiction constitutes a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity.
- Removal to federal court is a voluntary act for waiver purposes, even if the State was initially sued involuntarily in state court.
- When a State has consented to suit in its own courts for particular state-law claims, it may not remove those claims to federal court and then assert Eleventh Amendment immunity to defeat them there.
- Eleventh Amendment waiver by litigation conduct is a federal question and is not defeated by internal state-law allocations of authority.

## Conclusion

A State that has consented to suit in its own courts for certain state-law claims waives Eleventh Amendment immunity as to those claims by voluntarily removing the case to federal court, preventing the State from invoking federal jurisdiction while using immunity to bar the same claims.


Lapides v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. Sys. of Ga., 535 U.S. 613 (2002)