U.s. District court in New Hampshire denied plaintiffs' motion to dismiss counts I, II, III and IV. David perry: plaintiffs' reliance on ex parte young, and its progeny, is misplaced. He says Ex Parte Young Does not Apply to plaintiffs' Supremacy Clause claims. Perry: if a state official's action violates the constitution, a federal court should dismiss it.
Original Description:
Original Title
Defendant's Reply to Plaintiff's Objection to MTD
U.s. District court in New Hampshire denied plaintiffs' motion to dismiss counts I, II, III and IV. David perry: plaintiffs' reliance on ex parte young, and its progeny, is misplaced. He says Ex Parte Young Does not Apply to plaintiffs' Supremacy Clause claims. Perry: if a state official's action violates the constitution, a federal court should dismiss it.
U.s. District court in New Hampshire denied plaintiffs' motion to dismiss counts I, II, III and IV. David perry: plaintiffs' reliance on ex parte young, and its progeny, is misplaced. He says Ex Parte Young Does not Apply to plaintiffs' Supremacy Clause claims. Perry: if a state official's action violates the constitution, a federal court should dismiss it.