Main Content
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Mottley
Osborn was about the scope of the "arising under" power under the Constitution, specifically Article III, § 2, clause 1.
This case, in contrast, is about the scope of the "arising under" grant of power in a federal statute, specifically 28 U.S.C. § 1331. How broad is that statutory grant of power? What must a case have in it for it to "arise under" federal law? For purposes of the statute, where is the dividing line between cases that do and do not "arise under" federal law? Is the statutory line the same as Chief Justice Marshall's view of the line you saw in Osborn, the one that delimits the "arising under" power for purposes of the U.S. Constitution? If not, which one is broader?
This book, and all H2O books, are Creative Commons licensed for sharing and re-use with the exception of certain excerpts. Any excerpts from the Restatements of the Law, Principles of the Law, and the Model Penal Code are copyright by The American Law Institute. Excerpts are reproduced with permission, not as part of a Creative Commons license.