Californa to Nevada - we are happy if the lift on sovereign immunity works our way, but not your way

In 1979, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision, Nevada v Hall, by which it declared that the concept of the so-called "sovereign immunity" does not apply when a state is sued in the courts of another state.

The case was when Californians, victims of a motor vehicle accident that happened on a road in California, in a collision with a vehicle belonging to the State of Nevada, sued and obtained over a million dollars in damages against the State of Nevada.

The State of California was happy with the outcome and did not budge at that time.

The State of California started to budge when a citizen of Nevada (and a former citizen of California) sued California in the state court of Nevada and applied the same principle of Nevada v Hall - that California does not have sovereign immunity from suit in a tort action.

And NOW California is not happy.

Now California is filing briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Franchise Board of the State of California v Hyatt asking to overrule Nevada v Hal.  By the way, Franchise Board case already was in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003 before trial (the litigation spans decades) and was decided against the State of California. 

California advances arguments like these:

Remember, Nevada v Hall was decided in favor of citizens of the state of California to sue the State of Nevada in California State court.

California was happy at that time, and did not think that a million-dollar verdict against the State of Nevada was unfair.

Yet, it is not happy when the same rule was applied to the State of California as a defendant and the verdict is now payable to the citizen of the State of Nevada by the State of California.

So, now California is asking to overturn Nevada v Hall where Californians were the winners over the State of Nevada, to prohibit a citizen of Nevada to do in Nevada state courts exactly the same things as Californian citizens did to the State of Nevada in California state courts in Nevada v Hall.

If the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to uphold California's frivolous argument and overturn Nevada v Hall, what will be the next step in the circus - another lawsuit for a motor-vehicle accident in California against Nevada where Californians will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn "Franchise Tax"?