A state enacts a statute that allows its courts to hear cases involving federal causes of action, regardless of whether the parties reside within the state. A corporate defendant, incorporated and operating exclusively in another state, challenges the state court’s authority to hear the case. The defendant argues that Congress determines which courts can hear cases involving federal claims. What principle BEST explains the relationship between Congress and state court jurisdiction in this scenario?
State courts have limitations in their authority to hear cases based on federally created causes of action as defined by Congressional action.
State courts have jurisdiction over cases with federal causes of action involving parties from the same state.
Congress has the authority to authorize state courts to hear cases arising under federal law when Congress does not establish jurisdiction exclusive to federal courts.
The Eleventh Amendment can affect state courts hearing cases involving out-of-state parties under federal law.
The correct answer explains that Congress decides whether state courts can exercise jurisdiction over federal claims and that state courts typically have concurrent jurisdiction unless Congress explicitly establishes exclusive federal jurisdiction. The incorrect answers either misapply legal principles, such as the Eleventh Amendment—which pertains to sovereign immunity rather than jurisdiction—or incorrectly suggest jurisdiction depends on party citizenship or inherent limitations on state courts hearing federal cases.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What does concurrent jurisdiction mean in this context?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are examples of cases where Congress establishes exclusive federal jurisdiction?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does the Eleventh Amendment relate to state court jurisdiction?