Whether state law can limit the power of one state agency to waive the sovereign immunity of another

QUESTION PRESENTED Federal courts must respect a state’s “chosen means of diffusing its sovereign powers among various branches and officials.” Berger v. N.C. State Conf. of the NAACP, 597 U.S. 179, 191 (2022). Presuming state officials act in unison does “much violence to our system of cooperative federalism.” Jd. at 197. Federal interference in a state’s internal processes “strikes at the heart of the political accountability so essential to our liberty and republican form of government.” Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 751 (1999). But here, the Fourth Circuit created a federal rule presuming all state officials act in unison when waiving sovereign immunity. In the court’s view, one agency’s power to waive the immunity of another “does not matter” and the nature of its act is “immaterial.” Waiver by one state official is a waiver by all—even if state law says otherwise. The Fourth Circuit’s decision directly conflicts with multiple decisions of this Court and splits from the Second and Tenth Circuits. The question presented is: Whether state law can limit the power of one state agency to waive the sovereign immunity of another. u STATEMENT OF