Rejecting the Touchstone: Complete Preemption and Congressional Intent after Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson
Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law
South Carolina Law Review, Vol. 59, p. 225, 2008
The paper examines complete preemption - a jurisdictional doctrine that allows for removal based on a federal preemption defense contrary to the well-pleaded complaint rule. The doctrine was expanded by the Supreme Court in 2003 in Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson. This paper explores efficiency, separation of powers, and federalism problems created by Anderson, both generally and in the context of a specific statutory scheme - the Carmack Amendment. The paper then offers a new framework, modeled on concurrent jurisdiction case law, that ensures reliance on congressional intent but still allows a narrowly defined area for the judiciary to provide federal defensive removal where necessary to effectuate specific congressional purposes.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 72
Keywords: complete preemption, federal courts, well-pleaded complaint rule, civil procedure, separation of powers, federalism, removalAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: February 6, 2008
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.328 seconds