California v. Texas
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 17, 2021 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Decided
- June 17, 2021
- Term
- October Term 2020
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority author
- Justice Breyer
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Cite as: 593 U. S. ____ (2021) 1 ALITO, J., dissenting SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TEXAS v. CALIFORNIA ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A BILL OF COMPLAINT No. 153, Orig. Decided April 26, 2021 The motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied. JUSTICE ALITO, with whom JUSTICE THOMAS joins, dis- senting from denial of motion for leave to file complaint. Suppose the following occurred. A Texan and a Califor- nian are involved in a traffic accident in California. The Texan tries to sue the Californian in federal district court and invokes the “diversity” jurisdiction conferred by 28 U. S. C. §1332 (a)(1), which provides that “[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions . . . between . . . citizens of different States” where the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Suppose the district court refuses to allow the filing of the complaint and explains: “I know that the Constitution and a federal statute give me jurisdiction over diversity cases, and I know that the Fram- ers of the Constitution and the Congress that enacted the statute thought that diversity jurisdiction was important because it provides a neutral forum for out-of-state parties. But in my opinion, that’s not really so important anymore, and if I have to handle diversity suits, I won’t have the time I need to deal with more important matters. Therefore, in the exercise of…
Excerpt of a 19,247-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.