October Term 2001 · Docket 00-1514
Can a state sue in federal court after a related case dismisses?
The dispute centers on whether federal courts retain jurisdiction over state claims after dismissing federal claims.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Bolter argued Section 1367 solves procedural problems.
Mr. Rotenberg emphasized the federalism issue in the case.
Mr. Clement argued the statute excludes nonconsenting states.
The Chief Justice noted the case was submitted.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 5-33 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 5-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 27-29 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 27-29
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of supplemental jurisdiction under federal law.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 5-33 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 5-33
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 26, 2001.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the federal court to keep the state claims.
the opposing side wants the federal court to drop the state claims.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 5-33 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 5-33
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues Congress intended to solve procedural problems in federal courts.
the opposing side argues federal law should not apply to nonconsenting states.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 5-33 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 5-33
What the justices asked
The Chief Justice asked if the case was submitted.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 27-29 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 27-29
Why it matters
This issue defines the boundary between federal and state judicial power. It determines which courts handle mixed legal disputes. It affects the balance of power between governments.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 5-33 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 5-33
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 27-29 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 27-29
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 5-33 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 5-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 5-33 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 5-33
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.