L.Ed.2d 45 (1989). In Will, the Court found that a state was not a "person” as defined by § 1983 because reading the term “person” to include "state” under the statutory language would "be a decidedly awkward way of expressing an intent to subject the States to liability.” 10 . 28 U.S.C. § 1453(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(1). 11 . La.Code Civ. Proc. Ann. art. 591(A). 12 . See 151 Cong. Rec. S1157-02, S 1158, 2005 WL 309648 (Feb. 9, 2005). Senator Pryor introduced the amendment, stating, “My amendment simply clarifies that State attorneys general should be exempt from S. 5 and be allowed to pursue their individual State's interests as determined by themselves and not by the Federal Government.” Congress rejected the proposed amendment. Cf. Cooper Corp., 312 U.S. at 605, 607-09, 61 S.Ct. 742 (<HOLDING>). 13 . 28 U.S.C. § 1453(b) provides, "In
holding that the workers compensation act is to be liberally construed and reasonable doubts as to construction are to be resolved in favor of coverage holding that policy terms must be read in their ordinary and popular sense recognizing rule of statutory construction that statutes must be read as a whole and sections which are part of the same general statutory scheme must be construed together and each given effect if it can be done by any reasonable construction holding that statutes must be read so as to give effect to all statutory language holding that we are to read the statutory language in its ordinary and natural sense and if doubts remain resolve them in the light not only of the policy intended to be served by the enactment but as well by all other available aids to construction and looking to supplemental legislation and the scheme and structure of the legislation