Jules v. Andre Balazs Properties · ¶8
Regardless of how an FAA dispute begins, federal jurisdiction is not always a foregone conclusion. For a federal court to have jurisdiction over an arbitral dispute, it is not enough that the dispute implicates the FAA. That is because the FAA is “ `something of an anomaly' in the realm of federal legislation.” Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U. S. 49, 59 (2009). Although the FAA is a federal statute that provides federal standards, it “does not itself create [federal] jurisdiction.” Badgerow, 596 U. S., at 4. Instead, given the FAA's “nonjurisdictional cast,” a federal court must have an “ `independent jurisdictional basis' ” for granting FAA relief. Vaden, 556 U. S., at 59. That could come, for example, in the form of diversity jurisdiction if a dispute under the FAA arises between citizens of different States with over $75,000 at issue. See 28 U. S. C. § 1332(a). Or a court may have…Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.