to claims for damages under statutory rights created by Congress. Accordingly, we turn to an analysis of Alden in light of the Mannings’ claim. {24} Alden and its progeny stand for the proposition that state constitutional sovereign immunity bars individual claims for damages that are based on legislation passed by Congress pursuant to its Article I powers. Alden, 527 U.S. at 754, 119 S.Ct. 2240; Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Fla., 517 U.S. 44, 59, 116 S.Ct. 1114, 134 L.Ed.2d 252 (1996); see also Gill v. Pub. Employees Ret. Bd., 2004-NMSC-016, 135 N.M. 472, 90 P.3d 491 (discussing the holding in Alden while evaluating a claim for injunctive relief asserted against the State under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act); Cockrell, 2002-NMSC-009, ¶¶ 14-15, 132 N.M. 156, 45 P.3d 876 (<HOLDING>). Specifically, the issue in Alden, 527 U.S. at
holding right to liquidated damages under fair labor standards act nonwaivable holding a claim for injunction but not money damages against a state officer for a violation of the age discrimination in employment act enacted under article i section 8 of the united states constitution was not barred by sovereign immunity under the ex parte young exception holding that sovereign immunity barred a post alden claim under the fair labor standards act for money damages asserted against the state in state court holding that the otca limitations period applied to a claim alleging a breach of the fair labor standards act by the state holding claims based on the fair labor standards act subject to arbitration