Lathrop v. Deal
301 Ga. 408
| Ga. | 2017Background
- In 2012 Georgia enacted House Bill 954 restricting certain abortions; three OB/GYNs sued state officers in their official capacities seeking declaratory and injunctive relief that the statute violates the Georgia Constitution.
- Plaintiffs alleged violations of the state Due Process (privacy), Freedom of Conscience, Inherent Rights, Equal Protection clauses, and vagueness; they sought prospective relief only.
- After initial proceedings, the State defendants moved to dismiss based on sovereign immunity as interpreted in Georgia Dept. of Natural Resources v. Center for a Sustainable Coast ("Sustainable Coast").
- The trial court dismissed; plaintiffs appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court challenging whether sovereign immunity bars suits against the State (or its officers in official capacities) for prospective injunctive and declaratory relief grounded in constitutional claims.
- The Court framed the core question as whether constitutional or other provisions (e.g., Judicial Review Clause) waive sovereign immunity for such suits and whether official immunity bars suits against officials in their individual capacities.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does sovereign immunity bar suits against the State or its officers in official capacities for injunctive relief from alleged unconstitutional official acts? | Plaintiffs: No — constitutionally protected rights (e.g., due process/privacy) imply a right to sue the State to vindicate them. | Defendants: Yes — sovereign immunity (Art. I, § II, ¶ IX) bars such suits absent constitutional or statutory waiver. | Held: Yes — sovereign immunity generally bars those suits; no constitutional text waives immunity for these claims. |
| Does sovereign immunity bar suits for declaratory relief challenging statutes as unconstitutional? | Plaintiffs: Judicial Review Clause and Bill of Rights permit declaratory actions against the State. | Defendants: Sovereign immunity still bars declaratory relief against the State absent waiver. | Held: Sovereign immunity extends to declaratory relief (Olvera reaffirmed); Judicial Review Clause does not waive immunity. |
| Does the Judicial Review Clause or other constitutional provisions (aside from Takings) imply a waiver of sovereign immunity? | Plaintiffs: Judicial Review and fundamental rights imply courts must be able to hear such cases against the State. | Defendants: No implied waiver; waiver must be in Constitution or statute. | Held: No implied waiver — apart from the Takings Clause (self-executing remedy), other constitutional rights do not imply consent to suit. |
| Would official immunity bar suits against state officers in their individual capacities seeking prospective injunctive/declaratory relief? | Plaintiffs: Concern that individual-capacity suits are impractical and likely blocked by official immunity. | Defendants: Official immunity under Art. I, § II, ¶ IX(d) precludes such suits. | Held: Official immunity (¶ IX(d)) is focused on retrospective monetary liability; it does not generally bar prospective injunctive or declaratory relief against officials in their individual capacities. |
Key Cases Cited
- Center for a Sustainable Coast v. Ga. Dept. of Natural Resources, 294 Ga. 593 (2014) (sovereign immunity bars injunctive suits against State/officers in official capacities)
- Olvera v. Univ. System of Ga. Bd. of Regents, 298 Ga. 425 (2016) (sovereign immunity extends to declaratory relief absent waiver)
- Dennison Mfg. Co. v. Wright, 156 Ga. 789 (1923) (officials acting under unconstitutional statutes may be sued in individual capacity)
- Maddox v. Coogler, 224 Ga. 806 (1968) (sovereign immunity can bar equitable suits challenging constitutionality when State is real party)
- Peters v. Boggs, 217 Ga. 471 (1961) (sovereign immunity barred suit challenging appropriations when State was real party)
- Ramsey v. Hamilton, 181 Ga. 365 (1935) (suit against officers in official capacity is treated as suit against State)
- IBM Corp. v. Evans, 265 Ga. 215 (1995) (former, overruled holding that injunctive relief was excepted from sovereign immunity)
- Bailey v. Fulton County, 111 Ga. 313 (1900) (Due Process Clause does not imply a right to sue the State)
- Holcombe v. Ga. Milk Producers Confederation, 188 Ga. 358 (1939) (suit against officers acting under alleged unconstitutional statute maintainable in individual capacity)
- Undercofler v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 221 Ga. 824 (1966) (suit for injunctive/declaratory relief against officials acting under challenged statute is not necessarily a suit against State)