# Quern v. Jordan > Supreme Court of the United States · March 5, 1979 · 440 U.S. 332 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9427478 ## Case - **Full name:** Quern, Director, Department of Public Aid of Illinois v. Jordan - **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States - **Decided:** March 5, 1979 - **Citations:** 440 U.S. 332; 99 S. Ct. 1139; 59 L. Ed. 2d 358; 1979 U.S. LEXIS 67 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** Concurrence by Marshall - **Judges:** Rehnquist, Burger, Stewart, White, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens, Brennan, Marshall - **Cited by:** 4,076 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - **Yellow flag:** Reported overruled on other grounds by Hafer v. Melo, 502 U.S. 21 (1991) — not on the Supreme Court's list. - Negative treatments: 2 - Distinguished by: 2 - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9427478 ## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction) - stating that “§1983 does not explicitly and by clear language indicate on its face an - 31 - intent to sweep away the immunity of the States; nor does it have a history which focuses directly on the question of state liability and which shows that Congress considered and firml… - stating that “§ 1983 does not explicitly and by clear language indicate on its face an intent to sweep away the immunity of the States; nor does it have a history which focuses directly on the question of state liability and which shows that Congress considered and firmly deci… - explaining that § 1983 gives no indication “on its face an intent to sweep away the immunity of the States; nor does it have a history which focuses directly on the question of state liability and which shows that Congress considered and firmly decided to abrogate the Eleventh… - holding that in a Section 1983 action against the state “a federal court’s remedial power . . . is necessarily limited to prospective injunctive relief, and may not include a retroactive award which requires the payment of funds from the state treasury” (internal quotations an… - holding that injunction that state officials must inform individuals that they are entitled to apply to state for wrongly withheld benefits is not retroactive and thus not barred by Eleventh Amendment, even though such applications may ultimately result in state expenditures o… ## Opinion text Mr. Justice Marshall, concurring in the judgment. I concur in the judgment of the Court, for the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U. S. 651, 688 (1974), and my concurring opinion in Employees v. Missouri Public Health Dept., 411 U. S. 279, 287 (1973). Moreover, I agree that an affirmance here follows logically from the Court's decision in Edelman , because the explanatory notice approved by the Court of Appeals clearly is ancillary to prospective relief. But given that basis for deciding the present case, it is entirely unnecessary for the Court to address the question whether a State is a “person” within the meaning of § 1983. Accordingly, I join Parts I, II, and III of my Brother Brennan’s opinion. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9427478. Public record. Not legal advice.