Opinion ID: 1799
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: State Law and Declaratory Judgment Claims

Text: Upon dismissing the federal claims with prejudice, the district court concluded that it would not exercise jurisdiction over either the state law or declaratory relief claims. We affirm this decision because a district court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction when it has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3), and because the Declaratory Judgment Act ... does not provide an independent basis for federal jurisdiction. Victor Foods, Inc. v. Crossroads Econ. Dev., 977 F.2d 1224, 1227 (8th Cir.1992) (citation omitted). In sum, the initial complaint fails to plausibly allege the deprivation of a constitutional right, a necessary element of any § 1983 claim, and the district court was therefore correct in dismissing the federal claims with prejudice. As a result, the district court had discretion to dismiss the state law and declaratory relief counts without prejudice.