1285, Amalgamated Transit Union, 457 U.S. 15, 102 S.Ct. 2202, 72 L.Ed.2d 639 (1982), leads us to conclude that the complaint fails to set out a substantial federal question capable of sustaining federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. In Jackson, the Court held that suits involving section 13(c) agreements and collective bargaining contracts between UMTA aid recipients and transit unions are “governed by state law applied in state courts,” not by federal' law applied in federal courts. See id. at 29, 102 S.Ct. at 2210. In so doing the Court overruled several circuit court decisions to the contrary, including one by this circuit. See Local Division 714, Amalgamated Transit Union v. Greater Portland Transit District, 589 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.1978). Cf. Local Division 589, 666 F.2d 618 (<HOLDING>). Here, the challenged role of the Department
holding to the effect that section 1432a as impliedly amended by title vii preempts state law without limitation as to only conflicting state law holding that section 13c agreements do not override conflicting provisions of state law holding that  1983 does not override states eleventh amendment immunity holding that suits under 42 usc  1983 do not override state immunity holding that  1983 does not override a states eleventh amendment immunity