Black-letter propositions
- 01
Apply the well-pleaded-complaint rule; ignore anticipated defenses and federal counterclaims.
- 02
A federal ingredient must appear in the plaintiff's properly pleaded claim.
- 03
Declaratory-judgment actions are analyzed by asking whether the coercive action would arise under federal law.
- 04
A private federal cause of action usually suffices; an embedded issue requires the narrower substantial-federal-question test.
Use this attack sequence under time
Frame the issue
Is federal law an element of the claim?
Resolve the next checkpoint
Is the issue substantial to the federal system, not merely important to the parties?
Finish the conclusion
Would federal jurisdiction upset the congressionally approved division of labor?
Common wrong turns
- A federal defense never supplies ordinary federal-question jurisdiction.
- A complaint cannot manufacture jurisdiction by artful reference to federal law.
Worked example
A patient sues a drug manufacturer under state negligence law and alleges that violation of a federal labeling rule proves breach. The federal statute creates no private action.
The federal rule may be evidence of breach, but that alone does not necessarily create federal-question jurisdiction. Analyze whether the federal issue is necessarily raised, disputed, systemically substantial, and consistent with the federal-state balance.
Practice this topic
What the statute and the Constitution say
28 U.S.C. 1331 says the district courts have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States. It has no amount-in-controversy requirement. Article III, Section 2 extends the federal judicial power to all cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution, the laws of the United States and treaties.
The statute's phrase is arising under, so the question is whether the claim is created by federal law or depends on it.
How federal-question cases reach state and federal court
A federal question claim can be filed in state court unless a statute makes federal jurisdiction exclusive. It can also be removed there: 28 U.S.C. 1441(a) lets a defendant remove any civil action brought in a state court of which the district courts have original jurisdiction. That is why the removal statute matters even when the plaintiff chose state court.
Rule 8(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a pleading to contain a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional support.
Frequently asked questions
What is the controlling rule for federal-question jurisdiction?+
A federal court has federal-question jurisdiction only when a federal issue appears on the face of the well-pleaded complaint and satisfies the federal cause-of-action or embedded-federal-issue route.
What does 28 U.S.C. 1331 provide?+
That the district courts have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States.
Does federal question jurisdiction require an amount in controversy?+
No. Section 1331 contains no amount-in-controversy requirement, unlike the $75,000 figure in the diversity statute, 28 U.S.C. 1332(a).
What does Article III say about arising-under cases?+
Article III, Section 2 extends the judicial power to all cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution, the laws of the United States and treaties.
Can a defendant remove a federal question case from state court?+
Yes. Under 28 U.S.C. 1441(a), any civil action brought in a state court of which the district courts have original jurisdiction may be removed by the defendant.
What must a federal complaint say about jurisdiction?+
Under Rule 8(a)(1), a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional support.