Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corp. v. Feeney

1990-04-30

Headline: Court affirms that New York and New Jersey waived sovereign immunity for their Port Authority subsidiary, allowing employees to sue PATH in federal court and making federal suits against similar transit agencies easier.

Holding: The Court held that New York and New Jersey’s statutes, read with a venue clause naming federal judicial districts, show they waived Eleventh Amendment immunity and permit federal-court suits against PATH, so the Second Circuit’s rulings are affirmed.

Real World Impact:

Allows PATH employees to sue in federal court under federal workplace-safety laws.
Makes it harder for interstate agencies to claim state immunity when statutes allow federal venue.
Affirms Second Circuit and opens the way for federal trials on the workers’ claims.

Topics: state sovereign immunity, interstate transit agencies, workers' federal rights, federal court access

Summary

Background

Two employees of PATH — Patrick Feeney and Charles Foster — were hurt while working for PATH, the Port Authority Trans‑Hudson Corporation. PATH is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Port Authority created by New York and New Jersey under a 1921 compact. The workers sued PATH in federal court under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, the Boiler Inspection Act, and the Safety Appliance Act. PATH argued that it could not be sued in federal court because New York and New Jersey enjoyed Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Eleventh Amendment barred these federal lawsuits. The Court looked at New York’s and New Jersey’s statutes that consented to suit against the Port Authority and at a related venue clause. That clause said venue could be in a county or in a "judicial district . . . established by the United States," which the Court read to mean federal district courts. The majority concluded these statutes plainly showed the States intended to allow federal-court suits and therefore waived any Eleventh Amendment immunity. The Court affirmed the Second Circuit’s decisions that allowed the suits to proceed.

Real world impact

The ruling lets employees of PATH bring federal claims against the transit employer and makes it harder for similar interstate agencies to shield themselves behind state immunity when their creating statutes permit federal venue. The decision resolves the immunity question, but it does not decide whether the workers will win on their underlying injury claims. Those merits issues remain for the trial court.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Brennan, joined by three others, agreed the suits could proceed but added that the States’ consent was unnecessary. He argued that interstate agencies like the Port Authority are not "arms of the State" and that federal-question suits are not reached by the Eleventh Amendment.