Opinion ID: 11909
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Removal Jurisdiction —— Basic Principles

Text: We have recently reviewed the well established principles governing federal question removal jurisdiction.10 The denial of a motion to remand an action removed from state to federal court presents a question of federal subject matter jurisdiction and statutory construction which we review de novo on appeal.11 As a defendant’s use of the removal statute12 deprives a state court of a case properly before it and thereby implicates concerns of federalism, that statute must be strictly construed.13 It follows that the defendant who seeks to sustain removal must also bear the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction over the subject matter of the state court suit.14 As a general proposition, removal hinges on whether a federal district court could have asserted original jurisdiction over the state court action had it initially been filed in federal court.15 10 See id. at 365-67. 11 Garrett v. Commonwealth Mortgage Corp. of America, 938 F.2d 591, 593 (5th Cir. 1991). 12 28 U.S.C. § 1441. 13 Carpenter, 44 F.3d at 365-66. 14 Id. at 365. 15 See 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). 7 When a defendant seeks to remove a state court suit on the basis of federal question jurisdiction, as was the case here, removal will be appropriate only if the action is one “arising under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States.”16 In most cases, a defendant’s assertion of federal question removal jurisdiction will rise or fall on the allegations in the plaintiff’s “well-pleaded complaint,”17 that is, on whether “there appears on the face of the complaint some substantial, disputed question of federal law.”18 This means that the defendant must predicate his assertion of federal jurisdiction on the allegations of the plaintiff’s claim, not, for example, on the basis of an anticipated or even an inevitable federal defense.19 As Justice Cardozo succinctly put it, the defendant must show that a federal right is “an element, and an essential one, of the plaintiff’s cause of action.”20