“Both the Louisiana courts and federal district courts in Louisiana have consistently held that school boards are autonomous political subdivisions and not the alter ego of the state from the standpoint of sovereign immunity.” (citing authorities)
How later courts described this case
- “Both the Louisiana courts and federal district courts in Louisiana have consistently held that school boards are autonomous political subdivisions and not the alter ego of the state from the standpoint of sovereign immunity.” (citing authorities)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LIVINGSTON PARISH SCHOOL CIVIL ACTION
BOARD
VERSUS
META PLATFORMS, INC., ET AL. NO. 23-00807-BAJ-RLB
RULING AND ORDER
In this case, one of hundreds of similar actions initiated in jurisdictions across
the country, Plaintiff Livingston Parish School Board (LPSB) seeks damages from the
parent-companies of Facebook, Instagram, and Tik-Tok (collectively, the “Social
Media Defendants”), alleging that these social media platforms are highly addictive
to children, and deleterious to the learning environment that LPSB is required to
provide for its students. (Doc. 1-1 at 6-74, hereinafter “Petition”).
On July 18, 2023, LPSB initiated this action in the 21st Judicial District Court
for the Parish of Livingston, Louisiana. On August 23, 2023, the Social Media
Defendants removed LSPB’s action to this District, invoking diversity jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. (Doc. 1).
Now, LPSB seeks a remand to state court, solely on the basis that it is an “arm
of the State of Louisiana,” and therefore immune from federal jurisdiction under the
Eleventh Amendment. (Doc. 20). Remarkably, LPSB makes this argument blithely
ignoring that it has been squarely rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit, each of the three Louisiana U.S. District Courts, and Louisiana’s state courts,
too. See Minton v. St. Bernard Par. Sch. Bd., 803 F.2d 129, 132 (5th Cir. 1986) (“In
view of the inherently local nature of the interests of Louisiana school boards, the
wide degree of local autonomy they are granted under state law, and the
predominately local source of their funding, it cannot be said either that these entities
are mere arms of the state or that monetary judgments against them would represent
indirect impositions on the state treasury interfering with the state's fiscal
autonomy.”); Moore v. Tangipahoa Par. Sch. Bd., 594 F.2d 489, 494 (5th Cir. 1979)
(“Both the Louisiana courts and federal district courts in Louisiana have consistently
held that school boards are autonomous political subdivisions and not the alter ego of
the state from the standpoint of sovereign immunity.” (citing authorities)); Miranda
on behalf of M.M. v. Alexander, No. 21-cv-535, 2022 WL 832576, at *8 (M.D. La. Feb.
24, 2022) (rejecting Ascension Parish Board of Education’s claim to immunity: “[T]he
Fifth Circuit has expressly held that a ‘parish school board’ is not an ‘arm’ of the State
within the meaning of the Eleventh Amendment.” (citing authorities)), adopted, 2022
WL 831430 (M.D. La. Mar. 18, 2022); Beasley v. Sch. Dist. Bd of Educ. Iberia Par.,
No. 21-cv-03276, 2022 WL 807043, at *5 (W.D. La. Feb. 24, 2022) (rejecting Iberia
Parish School Board’s claim to immunity (citing authorities)), adopted, 2022 WL
806815 (W.D. La. Mar. 15, 2022); Sch. Bd. of Par. of St. Charles v. Roxco, Ltd., No.
01-cv-0359, 2001 WL 283094, at *1 (E.D. La. Mar. 21, 2001) (rejecting St. Charles
Parish School Board’s claim to immunity); Sch. Bd. of Par. of St. Charles v. Quala
Sys., Inc., 159 F. Supp. 2d 295, 297 (E.D. La. 2001) (same). As noted in the Social
Media Defendants’ opposition to remand, LPSB barely even mentions these
authorities, and fails altogether to explain why they do not compel the same result
here. (See Doc. 34 at 4-5).
“[T]his Court has repeatedly admonished that it will not speculate on
arguments that have not been advanced, or attempt to develop arguments on a
party's behalf.” Buchicchio v. LeBlanc, --- F.Supp.3d ----, 2023 WL 2027809, at *10
n.6 (M.D. La. Feb. 15, 2023) (Jackson, J.) (citing authorities). Absent any attempt to
distinguish this overwhelming tide of authority,1 and consistent with its own prior
rulings, the Court determines that LPSB’s claim to be an “arm of the State of
Louisiana” is plainly foreclosed by Fifth Circuit precedent. See Miranda, 2022 WL
832576, at *8 (citing Minton and concluding without further analysis that the parish
school board was not an arm of the state).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that LPSB’s Motion To Remand (Doc. 20) be and is
hereby DENIED.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 2nd day of November, 2023
_______________________________________
JUDGE BRIAN A. JACKSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
1 LPSB was invited to file a reply to the Social Media Defendants’ opposition to remand,
despite this Court’s general rule that reply briefs are limited to Rule 12 and Rule 56 motions.
(See Doc. 25 at 1). The Court deems LPSB’s failure to reply as a waiver, and a tacit admission
that it lacks any basis to distinguish the 40-year line of authorities establishing that a parish
school board is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. See Buchicchio v. LeBlanc,
2023 WL 2027809, at *10 n.6 (explaining that “a party's failure to adequately brief an issue
acts as a waiver”).