Article 3, Section 2, Clause 1 — Overview Of Cases To Which The United States Is A Party

prev | next

Article III, Section 2, Clause 1:

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State, between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Chisholm v. Georgia[1](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-3/section-2/clause-1/overview-of-cases-to-which-the-united-states-is-a-party#fn1art3 " 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419 (1793). ") that cases “between a state and citizens of another state” included those where a state was a party defendant provoked the proposal and ratification of the Eleventh Amendment . Since then, controversies between a state and citizens of another state include only those cases where the state has been a party plaintiff or has consented to be sued.[2](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-3/section-2/clause-1/overview-of-cases-to-which-the-united-states-is-a-party#fn2art3 " See the discussion under the Eleventh Amendment. ") As a party plaintiff, a state may bring actions against citizens of other states to protect its legal rights or in some instances as parens patriae to protect the health and welfare of its citizens. In general, the Court has tended to construe strictly this grant of judicial power, which simultaneously comes within its original jurisdiction, by applying the concepts of cases and controversies more rigorously than in cases between private parties.[3](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-3/section-2/clause-1/overview-of-cases-to-which-the-united-states-is-a-party#fn3art3 " Massachusetts v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 447 (1923); Florida v. Mellon, 273 U.S. 12 (1927); New Jersey v. Sargent, 269 U.S. 328 (1926). ") Specifically, in these circumstances, the Court holds rigorously to the rule that all the party defendants are citizens of other states[4](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-3/section-2/clause-1/overview-of-cases-to-which-the-united-states-is-a-party#fn4art3 " Pennsylvania v. Quicksilver Co., 77 U.S. (10 Wall.) 553 (1871); California v. S. Pac. Co., 157 U.S. 229 (1895); Minnesota v. N. Secs. Co., 184 U.S. 199 (1902). ") and adheres to congressional distribution of its original jurisdiction concurrently with that of other federal courts.[5](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-3/section-2/clause-1/overview-of-cases-to-which-the-united-states-is-a-party#fn5art3 " Wisconsin v. Pelican Ins. Co., 127 U.S. 265 (1888). ")

Footnotes

1

2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419 (1793) .

2

See the discussion under the Eleventh Amendment .

3

Massachusetts v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 447 (1923) ; Florida v. Mellon, 273 U.S. 12 (1927) ; New Jersey v. Sargent, 269 U.S. 328 (1926) .

4

Pennsylvania v. Quicksilver Co., 77 U.S. (10 Wall.) 553 (1871) ; California v. S. Pac. Co., 157 U.S. 229 (1895) ; Minnesota v. N. Secs. Co., 184 U.S. 199 (1902) .

5

Wisconsin v. Pelican Ins. Co., 127 U.S. 265 (1888) .