## Facts

- S.G. and A.E. filed state-law tort claims alleging injury from HIV-contaminated blood supplied by the American National Red Cross.
- The Red Cross is a federally chartered corporation whose charter authorizes it “to sue and be sued in courts of law and equity, State or Federal, within the jurisdiction of the United States.”
- The Red Cross removed the case to federal district court, asserting that the charter provision itself conferred original federal jurisdiction.
- The district court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to remand.
- The First Circuit reversed on interlocutory appeal, holding the charter did not confer original federal jurisdiction.
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve whether the charter language independently authorized federal jurisdiction and removal.

## Issues

1. Whether the Red Cross charter’s “sue and be sued … State or Federal” clause independently confers original federal-question jurisdiction over cases involving the Red Cross.
2. Whether such charter-based jurisdiction permits removal of state-law claims notwithstanding the well-pleaded complaint rule.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the First Circuit and remanded.
- The Court held that the Red Cross charter’s “sue and be sued … State or Federal” provision confers original federal jurisdiction over all cases to which the Red Cross is a party.
- Because original federal jurisdiction exists by statute, removal from state court was proper even though the underlying claims sounded in state tort law.

## Legal Principles

- A federal charter’s “sue and be sued” clause confers federal jurisdiction only if the clause expressly mentions federal courts (e.g., “State or Federal”).
- Clauses that authorize suit in generic terms (without a specific reference to federal courts) are treated as capacity-to-sue provisions, not independent jurisdictional grants.
- When Congress expressly grants federal jurisdiction for suits involving a federally chartered entity, the case “arises under” federal law for jurisdictional purposes by virtue of that statutory grant, not because the plaintiff’s claim necessarily presents a federal issue.
- Congress may, consistent with Article III, confer federal “arising under” jurisdiction over actions involving federally chartered corporations.

## Conclusion

The Court construed the Red Cross charter’s express reference to suits in “State or Federal” courts as a statutory grant of original federal jurisdiction, allowing the Red Cross to remove state-law actions to federal court without any independent basis such as diversity or a federal cause of action.


Am. Nat’l Red Cross v. S.G., 505 U.S. 247 (1992)