What does supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 allow?

• A. It allows federal courts to hear only federal claims, excluding state-law claims.
• B. It allows removal of cases from state court to federal court.
• C. It allows federal courts to hear related state-law claims that form part of the same case or controversy.
• D. It allows appellate review of state-law issues in federal court.

Answer: (C)

Supplemental jurisdiction lets a federal court hear state-law claims that are closely tied to a federal claim in the same action. If the claims share a common nucleus of operative fact and form part of the same case or controversy, the federal court may adjudicate the related state-law claims alongside the federal claim, rather than forcing separate lawsuits. This isn’t about removing cases or appellate review—it’s about keeping related issues together in one federal proceeding. For example, a federal-duty-to-pay claim paired with state-law contract claims arising from the same transaction can all be heard in one federal court due to this rule, provided the claims are sufficiently related. The court can also decline to exercise this authority in some scenarios, but the core idea is to include related state-law claims within the federal court’s reach when they arise from the same facts.