ELR Citation: ELR 20985
No(s). 84-1943 (9th Cir. Aug 12, 1985)

The court holds that the Eleventh Amendment bars an action against a state agency to enforce a federal statutory right, that private enforcement actions under 42 U.S.C. §1983 are foreclosed under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and that a California beetle eradication project is not a major federal action within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) simply because three federal officials participated on a state advisory board. The court first rules that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar an injunctive action against state officials of violations of federal statutory law, although it does bar similar actions against the state or one of its agencies. To hold that the Eleventh Amendment bars such suits against state officials would allow states to violate federal statutes with impunity, contrary to requirements of the Supremacy Clause. However, a suit by a private citizen against the state itself comes squarely within the prohibitions of the Eleventh Amendment. The state here has not waived its sovereign immunity or consented to suit in federal court, nor has Congress abrogated the state's immunity. The court then rules that FIFRA bars private actions under §1983. Although an action to enforce a federal statute may sometimes lie under §1983 even though the statute does not itself provide for private suits, Congress must not have foreclosed private enforcement in the statute and the statute must create "enforceable rights." Turning to the first element, the court finds the detailed and comprehensive nature of FIFRA's enforcement scheme, the legislative history behind the statute, and the delegation of primary enforcement responsibility to the states all indicate that Congress did intend to foreclose remedies not specified in FIFRA itself. Having decided that, the court does not find it necessary to determine whether FIFRA creates "enforceable rights." Finally, the court holds that the participation of three federal officials on the state Japanese beetle scientific advisory board does not in itself constitute major federal action triggering the requirements of NEPA. The state did not seek or spend federal funds on the eradication project, nor did the federal employees have any decisionmaking authority with respect to the project.

Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellants
Duane C. Miller
Miller & Rolfe
815 University Ave., Sacramento CA 95814
(916) 924-8600

Counsel for Defendants-Appellees
Roderick E. Walston
Department of Justice, 1515 K St., Sacramento CA 95814
(916) 445-4334

David C. Shilton
Land and Natural Resources Division
Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 633-5580

Before SNEED, TANG and CANBY, Circuit Judges.