October Term 2019 · Docket 18-877

Can Congress force states to pay for copyright infringement?

the sides that brought the case seek damages from North Carolina. The state claims sovereign immunity blocks the claim.

Official caption
Allen v. Cooper
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Shaffer argued Congress can make states pay for infringing federal rights. He stated this follows from the Constitution's text.

    Mr. Park argued state sovereign immunity is a fundamental constitutional feature. He stated immunity from private money damages remains inherent in sovereignty.

    Justice Ginsburg questioned the applicability of the patent decision to this case. She noted the same secure and exclusivity language appears in both.

    Justice Kagan asked if the Court must revisit the Florida Prepaid rule. She questioned if the sides that brought the case' view requires overturning that precedent.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act. It asks if Congress can waive state immunity for copyright claims.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 5, 2019.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want the Court to uphold the CRCA. They seek a monetary judgment against North Carolina.

North Carolina wants the Court to dismiss the suit. It seeks to maintain its sovereign immunity from private damages claims.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue Congress can make states pay for infringing federal rights. They cite the Constitution's text and the CRCA's validity.

North Carolina argues state sovereign immunity is a fundamental constitutional feature. It claims immunity from private money damages remains inherent in sovereignty.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Ginsburg asked if the patent decision applies to this copyright clause. She noted the same secure and exclusivity language appears in both.

Justice Kagan asked if the Court must revisit the Florida Prepaid rule. She questioned if the sides that brought the case' view requires overturning that precedent.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

The outcome defines state liability for federal copyright violations. It determines whether states can avoid paying for online infringement. This shapes the balance between federal rights and state autonomy.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON