Also known as: arising under jurisdiction · federal question jurisdiction
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A basis for federal subject-matter jurisdiction authorizing district courts to hear civil actions in which the plaintiff's well-pleaded complaint asserts a right to relief created by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
Alice Atkins sued a federal agency in district court alleging that agents violated her Fourth Amendment rights by conducting a warrantless search of her home and seizing documents. She sought damages directly under the Constitution without citing any express statutory remedy. The court exercised arising-under jurisdiction because her complaint asserted a right to relief under federal constitutional law.
Anika Anand filed a state-law contract claim in state court against Apex Dynamics. Apex answered by asserting a federal patent law defense and removed the case. The federal court remanded because the well-pleaded complaint contained only state claims and a federal defense cannot support arising-under jurisdiction.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Andre Antoine sued Anchor Bank in state court for breach of a loan agreement under state law. His complaint mentioned that the bank would likely defend by citing federal banking regulations. The bank removed on federal question grounds, but the court remanded because anticipated federal defenses do not create arising-under jurisdiction.
Abigail Alvarez, a state official, sued a neighboring city in federal court alleging that its pollution of an interstate waterway violated federal common law rights. The complaint asserted no statutory cause of action. The court found arising-under jurisdiction because the claim rested on federal common law.
Albert Allen sued a drug manufacturer in state court for negligence, alleging that violation of a federal labeling statute created a presumption of negligence under state law. The defendant removed. The court remanded because the federal statute did not create the cause of action and the claim did not necessarily turn on a substantial federal issue.
Anita Ali asserted a federal copyright claim and a related state unfair-competition claim against Artemis Logistics in the same complaint. The court exercised arising-under jurisdiction over the federal claim and supplemental jurisdiction over the state claim because both arose from the same nucleus of operative facts.
No. A case arises under federal law when the plaintiff alleges a right to relief directly under the Constitution or federal statutes even if Congress has not created an express remedy. Jurisdiction exists so long as the claim is not wholly insubstantial or frivolous.
No. The well-pleaded complaint rule limits the inquiry to the plaintiff's properly pleaded cause of action. A federal defense or counterclaim cannot supply federal question jurisdiction regardless of how central the federal issue may be.
No. A plaintiff cannot create arising-under jurisdiction by pleading or attacking an anticipated federal defense. Jurisdiction turns solely on whether federal law creates the plaintiff's own cause of action.
When the state claims form part of the same case or controversy as a federal claim that supplies original arising-under jurisdiction. The claims must share a common nucleus of operative fact so that they would ordinarily be tried together.
…scope of the state claim implicates the federal doctrine of pre-emption; while this interrelationship does not create statutory federal question jurisdiction, Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Mottley , 211 U. S. 149, its existence is relevant to the exercise of discretion. Finally, there may be reasons independent of jurisdictional considerations,…