Suing does not always involve money. It can mean trying to get someone to stop doing something, or to do something. In this context, suing means filling a legal complaint against an entity for reviewal by a court. So, the Justice Department is basically accusing Texas of doing something wrong, so they sue them in order for this action to be decided by the courts. If the courts find in favour of the Justice Department, they ask Texas to stop doing what they are doing.
As an example, Trump sued the states that voted against him in the recent election. Had he won, he would not have gotten any money, but those votes would have invalidated.
To sue someone is to bring a complaint of wrongdoing before the courts to adjudicate. It need not imply only financial restitution.
In the US, the highest law of the land is the Federal or US Constitution and it is a matter of principle that no government can make laws that do not abide by it. In this case, it appears that the DOJ is asking that the State law be ruled unconstitutional and therefore, unenforceable.
When the DOJ takes action, it takes place in the Federal (not State) court system. In this case the case will initially be heard in District Court (the lowest court in the Federal system) and likely go on to the US Court of Appeals and then possibly to the US Supreme Court (the highest court in the Federal System).
What you’re asking about is remedies. Money damages are certainly a type of relief that can be sought where appropriate, but a lawsuit can also ask ask a remedy that the court prevent the other party from doing something, force the other party to do something, or to have a law invalidated because it violates the Constitution among other things. In this case, the federal government is asking a federal court to declare the Texas law invalid because it violates the Constitution and to prevent anyone from acting on or enforcing that law.
Latest Answers