Whether there are additional ripeness or imminence requirements under the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity in actions for declaratory relief beyond those already imposed by a general Article III and prudential ripeness analysis

QUESTION PRESENTED The petitioners brought a § 1983 First Amendment pre-enforcement complaint for declaratory judgment against county attorney enforcement of Minnesota Statutes § 211B.02’s ban on false claims of political support. Although the petitioners satisfied the requirements for Article III standing, the Eighth Circuit, in conflict with existing Ninth Circuit precedent, imposed additional ripeness or imminence requirements under the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity in an action for declaratory relief beyond those already imposed by a general Article III standing prudential ripeness analysis. Minnesota RFL Republican Farmer Labor Caucus, 108 F.4th 1035, 1087-88 (8th Cir. 2022) (imposing additional Ex parte Young imminence requirements); National Audubon Society, Inc. v. Davis, 307 F.3d 835, 846-47 (9th Cir. 2002) (not imposing additional Ex parte Young imminence requirements). Whether there are additional ripeness or imminence requirements under the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity in actions for declaratory relief beyond those already imposed by a general Article III and prudential ripeness analysis. i