Federal Question Jurisdiction

when a question to which judicial power of Union is extended by constitution, forms an ingredient of original cause (federal ingredient), it's in power of Congress to give [lower federal courts] jurisdiction of cause, although other questions of fact or of law may be involved in it.

A suggestion of one party, other will or may set up claim under Constitution or laws of US, doesn't make suit one arising under Constitution or those laws.

Complainant in first instance shall be confined to statement of its cause of action, leaving to DF to set up his answer what his defense is, and if anything more than denial of complainants cause of action, imposing upon DF burden of proving such defense.

Under this rule, case arises under federal law if federal issue appears on face of proper complaint limited to allegations necessary to state proper claim for relief, relies on federal law

Holmes argues suit "arises under law that creates cause of action"

SCOTUS held counterclaim can't be basis of arising under jurisdiction

Civil action in which any party asserts claim for relief arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents, plant variety protection, or copyrights may be removed to district court of US for district and division embracing the place where action is pending

Under our interpretations, Congress has given lower federal courts jurisdiction to hear, originally or by removal from state court, only those cases in which well-pleaded complaint establishes either federal law creates cause of action or PL's right to relief necessarily depends on resolution of substantial question of federal law. (Franchise tax board of California v. construction of laborers vacation trust)

SCOTUS held case based on state law claim could arise under federal law if PL's case turned on important federal issue.

reaffirmed Smith v. Kansas TT; federal issue will ultimately qualify for federal forum only if federal jurisdiction is consistent w/ congressional judgement about sound division of labor between state and federal courts governing application of §1331----Question is, does state-law claim necessarily raise stated federal issue, actually disputed and substantial, which a federal forum may entertain w/out disturbing any congressionally approved balance of federal and state judicial responsibilities.

SCOTUS held case didn't arise under federal law, even though federal law created right to sue, b/c governing property law rules were provided by state or local law.

SCOTUS held Bell PL's claims did arise under federal law, b/c claimed right to recover under federal law. (\$\$\$ for fourth amendment violation)

generally, if PL asserts substantial claim provides basis for federal court jurisdiction, federal court will have supplemental jurisdiction over other claims arising from same facts.