It's not convincing at all. That opinion states that the States enjoy immunity because it had been a long-standing practice going back to before they joined the union. It's a long-standing practice of many civilized nations that the nation itself does not enjoy immunity from prosecution. If what Judge Kennedy wrote (Alden vs Maine happened in 1999!) isn't a no-argument I wouldn't know what is.
Also this: the State of Pennsylvania has committed grave injustice against thousands of its citizens. If they cannot get justice done through the courts what are they supposed to do instead? Take recourse to Direct Action? That's not desirable in civilized society. You can't be your own judge and executioner.
This is what government IS! Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary.
States have some subservience to the Federal government, as well.
The question really is "should the judiciary have power over the executive in this case, or should the executive or legistlature decide what compensation is appropriate." It's still "government" either way.
And let us remember which branch of government was the original villain in this case!
Also this: the State of Pennsylvania has committed grave injustice against thousands of its citizens. If they cannot get justice done through the courts what are they supposed to do instead? Take recourse to Direct Action? That's not desirable in civilized society. You can't be your own judge and executioner.