Mitzi Johanknecht, Sheriff, King County, Washington v. Eva Moore, et al.

In Los Angeles County v. Humphries, 562 U.S. 29 (2010), this Court held that the Monell “policy or custom” requirement applies to § 1983 suits for prospective relief against municipalities, thereby overruling prior Ninth Circuit authority. Here, Respondents Eva Moore and Brooke Shaw brought an official-capacity action against Petitioner, the King County Sheriff, to enjoin her from executing facially valid state court orders mandating restoration of property. When the Sheriff averred that mere execution of a court order fails the Monell test, Respondents countered that Monell did not apply because they were seeking prospective relief under Ex parte Young – a doctrine designed to avoid Eleventh Amendment immunity through official-capacity actions against state officials. The Ninth Circuit – sidestepping both Humphries and Monell – held that § 1983 did not apply, thereby allowing Respondents to proceed under “the judge-made cause of action recognized in Ex parte Young.” App. 17. The Ninth Circuit also held that the Sheriff’s status as a local or state official was immaterial. Id. at 18. The question presented is: Whether Ex parte Young establishes a novel and unprecedented judge-made cause of action, separate from § 1983, that can be used through an official capacity action to obtain prospective relief against a municipality whose local Sheriff faithfully executes facially valid state court orders.