United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana
ORDER AND REASONS
MORGAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
the Court is a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) for
failure to state a claim filed by Governor John Bel
Edwards. The motion is opposed. For the following
reasons, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
allege claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Governor
John Bel Edwards, among a variety of state and federal
officials. There is no mention of Governor Edwards in
the Plaintiffs' complaint except to list him as a
defendant. In their opposition to Governor
Edwards' motion to dismiss, the Plaintiffs contend they
seek relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because they
“sent by certified mail asking Governor John Bel
Edwards for help with constitutional and statutory
violations” and he “ignored the plaintiff's
[sic] formal complaints.” Plaintiffs seek
monetary relief from all named defendants.
extent the Plaintiffs sue Governor Edwards in his official
capacity, state officials in their official capacities are
not “persons” subject to suit under Section 1983
with respect to claims for monetary
compensation. Because a Section 1983 claim against a
state official in his official capacity for monetary damages
is actually a claim against the State itself, such a claim is
barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Accordingly, Plaintiffs'
Section 1983 claims against Governor John Bel Edwards in his
official capacity for monetary relief must be dismissed.
extent the Plaintiffs bring a Section 1983 claim against
Governor Edwards in his individual capacity, Plaintiffs have
not alleged Governor Edwards was personally involved in any
of the alleged acts or omissions upon which their claims are
based. Neither do Plaintiffs allege Governor Edwards had
knowledge of any alleged acts or omissions. To hold Governor
Edwards liable, Plaintiffs must establish that he was
“personally involved in the acts causing the
deprivation of [the Plaintiffs'] constitutional rights or
that a causal connection exists between an act of [Governor
Edwards] . . . and the alleged constitutional
violation.” Plaintiffs do not allege, and therefore
fail to establish, that Governor Edwards was personally
involved in any acts causing the deprivation of their
constitutional rights or that a causal connection exists
between any act of Governor Edwards and the alleged
constitutional violations. Accordingly, Plaintiffs'
claims against Governor John Bel Edwards in individual
capacity must be dismissed.
extent the Plaintiffs bring a claim against Governor Edwards
for supervisory liability, Plaintiffs also fail to state a
claim for relief. The Plaintiffs have not identified any
subordinate or employee of Governor Edwards to establish any
basis for supervisory liability. Further, “[o]fficials
acting in a supervisory role may only be held liable under
§ 1983 if they either (1) affirmatively participate in
acts that cause a constitutional deprivation or (2) implement
unconstitutional policies that causally result in the
plaintiffs injury.” Because the Plaintiffs do not
identify a subordinate of the Governor and fail to allege a
particular custom, usage, or policy for which the Governor
might be constitutionally liable, Plaintiffs fail to state a
claim for relief for supervisory liability under Section
1983. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' claims against Governor
Edwards for supervisory liability under Section 1983 must be
ORDERED that Governor John Bel Edwards' motion to
dismiss is GRANTED. The Plaintiffs'
claims against Governor Edwards are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
 R. Doc. 58.
 R. Doc. 64.
 R. Doc. 7-1.