3 ms·

"So apparently the government cannot break the law, by definition. What the hell?!" history/explanation in the 'introductory' section: http://www.law.harvard.

• jervisfm 13y ago
  IANAL but if the government is right by definition (on a legal basis), does that mean that the various suits now being filed don't have any teeth ?
• abecedarius 13y ago
  That history is pretty unsatisfying when it first quotes Holmes, presumably a century or so after the constitution was ratified. So next I looked at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_United_States#Federal_sovereign_immunity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_Unite... and it cites a case from 1983. This makes me at least wonder at the idea it derives directly from English law at the founding of the U.S.; "you can't sue the King" does not obviously transfer right over in the atmosphere of the time. ianal or historian.