Ex parte Young

This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (October 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Ex parte Young
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued December 2–3, 1907 Decided March 23, 1908
Full case name	Ex parte Edward T. Young, Petitioner
Citations	209 U.S. 123 (more) 28 S. Ct. 441; 52 L. Ed. 714; 1908 U.S. LEXIS 1726
Case history
Prior	Petition for writs of habeas corpus and certiorari
Holding
A lawsuit seeking an injunction against a state official did not violate the sovereign immunity of the state, because the state official was not acting on behalf of the state when he sought to enforce an unconstitutional law.
Court membership
Chief Justice Melville Fuller Associate Justices John M. Harlan · David J. Brewer Edward D. White · Rufus W. Peckham Joseph McKenna · Oliver W. Holmes Jr. William R. Day · William H. Moody
Case opinions
Majority	Peckham, joined by Fuller, Brewer, White, McKenna, Holmes, Day, Moody
Dissent	Harlan
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XI

Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), is a United States Supreme Court case that allows suits in federal courts for injunctions against officials acting on behalf of states of the union to proceed despite the State's sovereign immunity, when the State acted contrary to any federal law or contrary to the Constitution.^[1] That ruling allows plaintiffs to sue in federal courts to prevent state officials from enforcing unconstitutional state laws.