Chisholm v. Georgia (1793)

1) Link to the Actual Opinion
Read the U.S. Reports opinion (PDF)

2) Summary of the Opinion
A South Carolina citizen sued the State of Georgia in federal court. The Supreme Court allowed it under Article III jurisdiction.

3) Why It Mattered
The decision sparked outrage and directly led to the Eleventh Amendment, which barred such suits and reshaped state sovereign immunity.

4) What It Provided or Took Away

• Provided: For a short time, federal courts could hear suits by private citizens against states.
• Took Away: Quickly reversed by the Eleventh Amendment, restoring broad immunity to states.

5) Overreach or Proper Role?
It was a bold, text-driven reading of Article III, but many saw it as intruding on state sovereignty. The quick amendment showed how constitutional checks worked against perceived overreach.

6) Plain-English Impact Today
You generally cannot sue a state in federal court for money damages without its consent or a valid federal override.

• State Sovereignty
• 11th Amendment
• Early Republic
• Foundational