About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (December 4, 2019)

handle is hein.crs/govbivw0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Resarh Servi k-M- Make it Snappy? Congress Debates 'Snap Removals of Lawsuits to Federal Court December 4, 2019 Whether a lawsuit proceeds in state or federal court can have significant practical consequences. For various reasons, some litigants and commentators perceive state courts as more favorable to plaintiffs and federal courts as more favorable to defendants. For instance, the procedural requirements that a plaintiff must satisfy to survive dismissal of a federal lawsuit can be more stringent than the requirements that apply in many state courts. Certain observers also claim that state courts may be inclined to disfavor out- of-state defendants. These perceived differences between state court and federal court often encourage litigants to engage injorum shopping; that is, plaintiffs sometimes expend significant effort and resources seeking to keep cases in state court, while some defendants do the same to try to move cases to federal court. Apart from the direct consequences to the litigants themselves, the forum in which a particular lawsuit proceeds may also implicate principles of federalism, as well as issues regarding the allocation of federal and state judicial resources. Subject to certain constitutional limitations, Congress may enact-and has enacted-legislation influencing where cases are litigated. Some have debated, however, whether existing federal laws on this subject are adequate. On November 14, 2019, the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary's Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet (Subcommittee) held a hearing to consider whether to amend federal law to prohibit or discourage a technique called snap removal, which allows defendants to avoid certain otherwise applicable restrictions on removing cases filed in state court to federal court. This Sidebar describes existing federal laws governing whether particular cases proceed in state or federal court before describing snap removals and their potential significance to Congress. Federal Jurisdiction Federal courts are courts of limited subject matter jurisdiction, which means that federal courts generally cannot adjudicate a case unless (1) the case involves one of the subjects listed in Article TiB, § 2 of the Constitution, and (2) Congress passes a law affirmatively authorizing federal courts to hear that type of case. To that end, Congress has enacted several statutes authorizing federal courts to hear specific classes of cases, such as cases arising under federal law, bankruptcy cases, certain class actions, certain lawsuits against the United States, and so forth. As relevant here, 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(1) grants the federal courts what is known as diversity jurisdiction, which permits federal courts to adjudicate lawsuits between Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov LSB10380 CRS Lega Sidebar Prepaed for Membeivs and Cornm ittees o4 Co q _gress ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most