We will finish Non-Article III, with why have magistrates and with the bankruptcy judges under §§ 157-158.
Then move to Eleventh Amendment. Given that we have a week, just read the entire section; I hope to get about 1/2-way through in the double session. As part of the Ex parte Young reading, consider the following:
Florida amends its defamation statute (covering private civil actions for defamation) to eliminate the requirement that the plaintiff prove "actual malice" by clear-and-convincing evidence. This provision is invalid under the First Amendment. And individual who expects to speak and is worried about being sued under the statute brings an EpY action seeking to enjoin enforcement of the new law; he sues the Attorney General (to stop enforcement); the Chief Judge of the Florida Eleventh Judicial Circuit (to stop adjudication of any lawsuits under the new law); and the Clerk of Court for the Florida Eleventh Judicial Circuit (to stop acceptance and filing of any lawsuits under the new law). Is this a proper EpY action?
To be clear: We now move into Phase II of the course. Phase I considered the jurisdiction that all levels of federal courts wield; Phase II considers judge-made limitations on the courts' power.
