Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp. · ¶64

Turning to Hess, that case framed the inquiry as asking whether the “State [was] in fact obligated to bear” the entity's judgments “both legally and practically,” and mentioned that the entity had generated its own revenue for years. 513 U. S., at 45–46, 51. In answering that inquiry, the Court focused on whether “the compact or the laws of either State” required them to do so, and the Court ultimately concluded that the States' lack of “legal liability for Port Authority debts” and formal “responsib[ility] for the payment of judgments” cut against arm-of-the-State status. Id., at 46. Hess's concentration on formal liability, rather than an overall evaluation of the entity's financial relationship with the State, is confirmed by this Court's other precedents as well. See, e. g., Planters' Bank, 9 Wheat., at 907 (“judgment[s]” against state-created bank would “be satisfied by the…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.