In the 1983 case of Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Johnson, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a federal agency operating in a local area is not immune from state and local laws unless Congress has explicitly granted such immunity. The case arose when an employee of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), which was established by an interstate compact between Virginia, Maryland, and D.C., sued for damages under a D.C. law after being injured on the job due to WMATA's negligence. WMATA claimed it had sovereign immunity as a federal entity and could not be sued without its consent under this particular law. The court disagreed with WMATA’s claim stating that although created through an interstate compact approved by Congress, it did not make them immune from lawsuits brought under state or local laws because there was no explicit Congressional intent granting such broad immunity in their enabling legislation.

In the dissenting opinion for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Johnson, Justice Brennan disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold sovereign immunity for interstate agencies like WMATA. He argued that this ruling contradicted previous decisions where federal courts had jurisdiction over cases involving constitutional rights and federal law violations by state entities. Furthermore, he contended that Congress intended to waive such immunity when it approved the Compact Clause allowing states to form interstate agencies like WMATA. By upholding sovereign immunity in this case, Brennan believed the court was denying individuals their right to seek redress for injuries caused by these entities' negligence or misconduct under federal laws - a fundamental principle of justice and fairness in our legal system.