declaration of the state’s intention to submit its fiscal problems to other courts than those of its own creation must be found. Great Northern, 322 U.S. at 54, 64 S.Ct. at 877 This final caveat guides this Court today. The State of Georgia has explicitly consented to actions seeking recovery of taxes “erroneously and illegally assessed and collected ... under the laws of this state.” O.C.G.A. § 48-2-35(a)-(d). Awards are drawn directly from the state tre f’s claims against the State for damages or prospective relief. B. Abrogation Plaintiff argues that Congress actually abrogated state sovereign immunity for constitutional claims by passing 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but this argument is clearly incorrect. See Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 342, 99 S.Ct. 1139, 1145-46, 59 L.Ed.2d 358 (1979) (<HOLDING>); Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491
holding that suits under 42 usc  1983 do not override state immunity holding that the tia does not abrogate states immunity under the eleventh amendment holding that  1983 does not override states eleventh amendment immunity recognizing the eleventh amendment does not bar the united states from suing a state holding that congress did not intend to disturb the states eleventh amendment protection in passing  1983