Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp. · ¶66

More generally, NJ Transit advocates for an arm-of-the- State inquiry that places more weight on the State's control over, and practical financial relationship with, the entity. For support, NJ Transit points to a series of cases outside the sovereign immunity context. See Biden v. Nebraska, 600 U. S. 477 (2023) (standing); Arkansas v. Texas, 346 U. S. 368 (1953) (standing); Lebron v. National Railroad Passen ger Corporation, 513 U. S. 374 (1995) (First Amendment); Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738 (1824) (intergovernmental tax immunity). As those very cases warned, however, an entity “can count as part of the State for some but not `other purposes.' ” Nebraska, 600 U. S., at 494, n. 3; see Lebron, 513 U. S., at 392, 400 (holding that Amtrak is “part of the Government for purposes of the First Amendment” but lacks the Government's “sovereign immunity”); see also Priddy, 295…

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