Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish · ¶53

Louisiana's theory is not consistent with the statutory text. The statute permits the removal of state-court suits against “any officer (or any person acting under that officer)” that are “for or relating to any act under color of such office.” 28 U. S. C. § 1442(a)(1). It contemplates removal of suits against officers or their agents for acts that were not done under color of their offices, so long as the suits “relat[e] to” such acts. Louisiana's interpretation would leave the “relating to” requirement with little, if any, independent function. As the Fifth Circuit explained, Louisiana's interpretation “impermissibly confates the `distinct' `acting under' and `connected or associated with' elements of the federal officer removal test.” 103 F. 4th, at 335. We generally do not read a statute “in a way that makes part of it redundant.” Na tional Assn. of Home Builders v. Defenders of…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.