Fin. Oversight & Mgmt. Bd. for P.R. v. Centro de Periodismo Investigativo, Inc., 2023 U.S. LEXIS 1890 (S. Ct. May 11, 2023) (Kagan, J.). A recently enacted federal statute establishes a financial oversight board within the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico’s government. The question presented is whether the statute categorically abrogates any sovereign immunity the board enjoys from legal claims. We hold it does not. Under long-settled law, Congress must use unmistakable language to abrogate sovereign immunity. Nothing in the statute creating the board meets that high bar. The standard for finding a congressional abrogation is stringent. Congress, this Court has often held, must make its intent to abrogate sovereign immunity “unmistakably clear in the language of the statute.” E.g., Kimel, 528 U. S., at 73, 120 S. Ct. 631, 145 L. Ed. 2d 522 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Sossamon v. Texas, 563 U. S. 277, 287, 131 S. Ct. 1651, 179 L. Ed. 2d 700 (2011) (“[W]here a statute is susceptible of multiple plausible interpretations,” we will not read it to strip immunity). In short, nothing in PROMESA makes Congress’s intent to abrogate the Board’s sovereign immunity “unmistakably clear.” Kimel, 528 U. S., at 73, 120 S. Ct. 631, 145 L. Ed. 2d 522. The statute does not explicitly strip the Board of immunity. It does not expressly authorize the bringing of claims against the Board. And its judicial review provisions and liability protections are compatible with the Board’s generally retaining sovereign immunity. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered.