BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore.
The Supreme Court addressed whether the Fourth Circuit had jurisdiction to review all grounds for removal in a case involving BP and the City of Baltimore. The Court concluded that appellate review is permitted for the entire remand order when removal is based on federal officer jurisdiction under § 1442. The decision vacated the Fourth Circuit's ruling and remanded the case for further consideration.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore.
The Court held that the Fourth Circuit erred in holding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider all of the defendants' grounds for removal under § 1447(d).
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore
The case involves the power of appellate courts to review remand orders, which is a core aspect of judicial review.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Held: The Fourth Circuit erred in holding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider all of the defendants' grounds for removal under § 1447(d).
-
Why State–Federal Power is relevant to BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore
The case addresses the allocation of authority between state and federal courts, particularly in the context of removal jurisdiction.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The defendant companies removed the case to federal court invoking a number of grounds for federal jurisdiction, including the federal officer removal statute, 28 U. S. C. § 1442.
-
Why Preemption is relevant to BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore
The case involves the question of whether federal law allows for removal of cases from state to federal court, implicating federal preemption over state jurisdiction.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The ordinary meaning of § 1447(d)'s text permits appellate review of the district court's entire remand order when a defendant relies on § 1442 or § 1443 as a ground for removal.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore that support the summary and concepts above.
The Fourth Circuit erred in holding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider all of the defendants' grounds for removal under § 1447(d).
The ordinary meaning of § 1447(d)'s text permits appellate review of the district court's entire remand order when a defendant relies on § 1442 or § 1443 as a ground for removal.
The Court declines to consider the merits of the defendants' removal grounds and remands for the Fourth Circuit to consider those matters in the first instance.
