Eleventh Amendment immunity). Although some of the lyrics are different this time, the tune is essentially the same and still does not ring true. As was noted in Bell Atlantic-Delaware, cases such as this are in the nature of an appeal from an agency decision, and it is “odd indeed for an administrative agency to assert immunity from judicial review of its decisions.” Id. at 228 (footnote omitted). More to the point, however, both this court and the Third Circuit have made it abundantly clear that, because the State of Delaware has chosen to participate through the PSC in the federal regulatory scheme established by the Act, the decisions rendered by the PSC in exercising that Congressionally delegated power are subject to review in federal court. MCI Telecomm. Corp., 271 F.3d at 510 (<HOLDING>); Bell Atlantic-Delaware, 80 F.Supp.2d at 233
holding that a states consent to suit in federal court must be unequivocally expressed holding that the statute must specify the states intention to subject itself to suit in federal court in order to constitute a waiver holding that the opportunity for the states to exercise federal power by having a continued role in regulating local telecommunications came with a condition attached the submission to suit in federal court recognizing a distinction between the power of a federal court to hear statelaw claims and the discretionary exercise of that power holding states in exercising the federal trust power over indian tribes pursuant to a federal statute authorizing them to do so may enact legislation that would be an otherwise unconstitutional exercise of state power