![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Must discuss Motley--Layne & Bowler--Kansas City--Merrell Dow line of cases defining what constitutes jurisdiction on the face of the complaint. -- 8^D BD2412 gab 21:26, 2005 Apr 9 (UTC)
There has been considerable dispute over what constitutes a "federal question" in these circumstances, but it is now settled law that the plaintiff cannot seek the jurisdiction of a federal court merely because it anticipates that the defendant is going to raise a defense based on the Constitution, or on a federal statute.
This should be supplemented with a discussion or cite to:
Louisville & Nashvill RR. Co. v. Mottley
Supreme Court of the United States, 1908.
211 u.s. 149, 29 S.Ct. 42, 53 L.Ed. 126.
"Article III of the United States Constitution permits federal courts to hear such cases, so long as the United States Congress passes a statute to that effect." This sentence says that in order for the federal courts to hear cases under the Constitution, a federal statute, or a treaty, the Congress first has to pass a law permitting such jurisdiction. Where is that requirement in Article III of the Constitution? I don't see it.
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Must discuss Motley--Layne & Bowler--Kansas City--Merrell Dow line of cases defining what constitutes jurisdiction on the face of the complaint. -- 8^D BD2412 gab 21:26, 2005 Apr 9 (UTC)
There has been considerable dispute over what constitutes a "federal question" in these circumstances, but it is now settled law that the plaintiff cannot seek the jurisdiction of a federal court merely because it anticipates that the defendant is going to raise a defense based on the Constitution, or on a federal statute.
This should be supplemented with a discussion or cite to:
Louisville & Nashvill RR. Co. v. Mottley
Supreme Court of the United States, 1908.
211 u.s. 149, 29 S.Ct. 42, 53 L.Ed. 126.
"Article III of the United States Constitution permits federal courts to hear such cases, so long as the United States Congress passes a statute to that effect." This sentence says that in order for the federal courts to hear cases under the Constitution, a federal statute, or a treaty, the Congress first has to pass a law permitting such jurisdiction. Where is that requirement in Article III of the Constitution? I don't see it.