108
Opinion of Thomas, J.
or more employees for and in behalf of himself or themselves and other employees similarly situated" (emphasis added)), and so may be viewed as falling outside the overlap described above.6
B
Even if § 626(b) incorporates § 216(b)'s individual right-of-action provision, that provision itself falls short of "un-mistakable" clarity insofar as it describes the forum for suit as "any Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction." § 216(b) (emphasis added). For it may be that a federal court is not "competent" under the Eleventh Amendment to adjudicate a suit by a private citizen against a State unless the State consents to the suit. As we explained in Employees, "[t]he history and tradition of the Eleventh Amendment indicate that by reason of that barrier a federal court is not competent to render judgment against a nonconsenting State." 411 U. S., at 284 (emphasis added). The Court suggests, ante, at 76-77, that its ability to distinguish a single precedent, ante, at 75-76 (discussing Kennecott Copper Corp. v. State Tax Comm'n, 327 U. S. 573 (1946)), illuminates this aspect of § 216(b). But the Court neither acknowledges what Employees had to say on this point nor explains why it follows from the modern § 216(b)'s clarity relative to the old § 216(b) that the modern § 216(b) is clear enough as an absolute matter to satisfy the Atascadero rule, which requires "unmistakable" clarity.
That is not to say that the FLSA as a whole lacks a clear statement of Congress' intent to abrogate. Section 255(d)
6 The other two cases upon which the Court relies, see ante, at 74-75 (citing McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co., 513 U. S. 352, 357 (1995), and Lorillard v. Pons, supra, at 582), are also consistent with the view that the ADEA incorporates only "extras" from the FLSA, not overlapping provisions. In neither case did we consider whether the ADEA incorporates the part of § 216(b) that creates a private action "against any employer (including a public agency) in any Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction."
Page: Index Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NextLast modified: October 4, 2007