Also known as: arise under · arises under · arisen under · arising-under · federal question
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A category of cases over which federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction when the plaintiff's well-pleaded complaint asserts a claim founded directly on the Constitution, federal statutes, or treaties. The determination turns solely on the face of the complaint and does not extend to anticipated defenses or counterclaims. Jurisdiction exists even without an express statutory cause of action if the plaintiff alleges a right to relief under federal law.
Adrian Aguilar sues a federal agency in district court alleging that a new regulation violates his rights under the Fifth Amendment. The complaint pleads only the constitutional violation and requests injunctive relief. The court exercises jurisdiction because the claim is founded directly on the Constitution.
Alexandra Armstrong files suit in federal court claiming that federal officers violated her Fourth Amendment rights during a search and seeks damages. No statute expressly authorizes the remedy. The court recognizes jurisdiction because the complaint alleges a right to relief directly under the Constitution.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Audrey Ashton brings an action in district court alleging that a company infringed her federal copyright in climate maps. The complaint rests exclusively on the copyright statute. Jurisdiction exists under the statute granting district courts power over civil actions arising under federal law.
Alan Ackerman sues in federal court alleging that a federal statute preempts a state contract claim arising from a government procurement. The complaint pleads only the federal preemption issue. The court exercises arising-under jurisdiction because the claim is founded directly on federal law.
Andrew Avery sues in district court claiming that a federal benefits statute governs his parental-rights dispute. The complaint rests exclusively on the federal statute. Jurisdiction exists because the claim arises under federal law within the meaning of § 1331.
Adam Anderson sues in state court on a state-law contract claim. The defendant answers by asserting a federal preemption defense. The plaintiff cannot remove the case to federal court because the federal issue appears only in the answer.
The well-pleaded complaint rule requires that the plaintiff's properly pleaded cause of action be founded on federal law. Defenses and counterclaims cannot supply the federal element.
Supporting sources
No. Jurisdiction is determined solely from the face of the complaint. Allegations that merely anticipate a federal defense do not create arising-under jurisdiction.
Supporting sources
Yes. A case arises under federal law when the plaintiff alleges a right to relief directly under the Constitution even if the provision does not expressly create a civil remedy.
Supporting sources
The state claim must share a common nucleus of operative fact with a federal claim so that the plaintiff would ordinarily be expected to try both in one proceeding.
Supporting sources
No. Section 1331 is narrower than the constitutional grant in Article III, although Congress intended the statute to reach the full constitutional scope.
Supporting sources
…second section of the third article of the Constitution gives this court appellate jurisdiction in all cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States (except the cases in which it has original jurisdiction) with such exceptions and under such regulations as Congress shall make. The term…