3 ms·
> but instead that the government is granted immunity for some subset of actions. It's actually the opposite. You can only sue the government when they explici
by iudqnolq 6y ago
> but instead that the government is granted immunity for some subset of actions.
It's actually the opposite. You can only sue the government when they explicitly give you permission.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_Unit...
- monocasa 6y agoThe whole point I'm making here is that you can sue an entity without personhood.
- iudqnolq 6y agoThat's right. I just pointed out the one of the pieces of evidence you used is slightly wrong. Suing the government is a very special case.
- monocasa 6y agoSee the "Exceptions and abrogation" section of your own citation. It is indeed a (albeit large) subset of actions to which they can apply sovereign immunity.
- iudqnolq 6y agoYes. All I'm trying to say is it's opt-in, not opt out. I don't find this particularly interesting or important so this is the last comment I'll make here.
- monocasa 6y agoExcept it's not opt-in for a certain subset of actions of the government. For instance they can't block a discrimination suit on sovereign immunity grounds.