Congressional Control of Jurisdiction

Question 1

General Constitutional Limit

Answer 1

(1) does Art. III allow it?
(2) is Congress exercising Art. I N&P power? (i.e. to protect federal interest like federal judiciary or substantive right)

Question 2

Foothold jurisdiction

Answer 2

(Battaglia): a court has jurisdiction to determine whether it has jurisdiction

Question 3

Hart’s Constitution

Answer 3

1) lower federal courts unnecessary
2) state courts are primary guarantors of fed rights
3) some remedies are constitutionally necessary (e.g. habeas, just comp.)
4) Congress can reduce/eliminate state court jurisdiction subject to necessary remedies proviso (some court)

Question 4

Concurrent Jurisdiction

Answer 4

Presumption: state courts can entertain federal claims

Yellow Freight, Supremacy Cl., Federalist 82

Question 5

Methods to Exclude State Court Jurisdiction

Answer 5

1) make federal jurisdiction exclusive

2) removal

Question 6

How to Rebut Presumption of Concurrent Jurisdiction (i.e. make federal jurisdiction exclusive)

Answer 6

(Tafflin):

1) explicit statutory directive
2) unmistakable implication from leg. history
3) ~clear incompatibility between state court jurisdiction and federal interests

Clear statement rule (Yellow Freight, Tafflin Scalia): legislative history disfavored; conferral of federal jurisdiction doesn’t impliedly exclude state jurisdiction

Incompatibility = (i) desirability of uniform federal interpretation, (ii) expertise of federal judges on federal law, (iii) assumed greater hospitality of federal courts to federal claims

Question 7

Removal General Rule

Answer 7

General rule (§1441): in civil case, defendant can remove if federal DC has OJ

Question 8

Federal Official Removal

Answer 8

(§1442): [broader] in civil/criminal case against federal official, off. can remove (TN v. Davis) as long as they raise a federal defense (Mesa, Art. III FQ limit)

Question 9

Constitutional Limits on State Authority

Answer 9

Damages – permitted against federal officials (but often preempted, removed)

Injunctions – uncertain whether permitted (replevin permitted in Slocum)

Habeas corpus limit (Tarble’s Case) – state courts cannot issue against federal officials

Mandamus limit (McClung) – state courts cannot issue mandamus against federal officials

Question 10

State Court Obligation to Exercise Jurisdiction

Answer 10

(Testa): Supremacy Clause requires state court to accept jurisdiction for federal COAs (if state court accepts jurisdiction, federal law/policy = state law)

Question 11

Nondiscrimination Principle

Answer 11

State cannot discriminate against federal claims based on policy disagreements (Mondou)

Valid excuses: state court can refuse federal COA as long as it has a valid, nondiscriminatory reason (Douglas, forum non conveniens; Herb city court w/ limited jur.)

Nondiscriminatory rules with no valid excuse forbidden (Haywood): even if nondiscriminatory, state cannot undermine federal law based on policy disagreements (test – whether “jurisdictional” rule reflects concerns of power over person/SJ or policy)