Close Menu
    Trending

    Why Did New Jersey Invoke Sovereign Immunity?

    Law 3 Mins Read
    New Jersey Transit

    First appeared in DC Journal

    By Aron Solomon

    New Jersey Transit, a state-owned transportation system, has been ruled to be shielded from a negligence lawsuit in Pennsylvania due to sovereign immunity. 

    Sovereign immunity is a legal doctrine that protects government entities from being sued without their consent. 

    The concept of sovereign immunity was derived from British common law doctrine based on the idea that the King could do no wrong. In the United States, sovereign immunity typically applies to the federal government and state government, but not to municipalities. 

    Federal and state governments, however, have the ability to waive their sovereign immunity. The federal government did this when it passed the Federal Tort Claims Act, which waived federal immunity for numerous types of torts claims

    However, this rule was later superseded by the Eleventh Amendment, which states that “The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.” 

    As such, a citizen of State A can no longer sue State B. Sovereign immunity is used as a means of protecting the government from having to alter its policies any time a person takes issue with them

    Last Friday, The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania ruled that New Jersey Transit’s sovereign immunity extends across the Delaware River and prevents the agency from being sued in Pennsylvania. This decision has sparked controversy and raises several concerns.

    First, the decision limits the ability of Pennsylvania residents to seek justice for injuries caused by New Jersey Transit’s negligence. This is particularly concerning given that New Jersey Transit operates trains and buses that travel across state lines, and therefore, accidents and injuries can occur in Pennsylvania. The ruling effectively means that Pennsylvania residents cannot hold New Jersey Transit accountable for any harm caused by their actions.

    Second and perhaps more important, the decision sets a precedent that could be used to shield other out-of-state government entities from lawsuits in Pennsylvania. This could have far-reaching implications for Pennsylvania residents who may be injured by government entities from other states.

    Michael Epstein, a New Jersey lawyer, observes that “The central issue here sits at the intersection of justice and accountability. It limits the ability of Pennsylvania residents to seek justice for injuries caused by New Jersey Transit’s negligence and sets a precedent that could be used to shield other out-of-state government entities from lawsuits in Pennsylvania.”

    Pennsylvania lawyer, Tim George, adds “This case reinforces how important it is to ensure that government entities are held accountable for their actions and that justice is accessible to all.”

    This decision can be appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which has the authority to review and make final judgments in cases heard by The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. 

    Discover more from Today's Esquire

    Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

    Share.

    Keep Reading