Insights & Events

In a recent Law360 article, Hollingsworth LLP attorneys Kyle McWaters, Ann Farr, and Kelly Hutchinson analyzed the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Chevron USA v. Plaquemines Parish, which confirmed the broad the scope of federal officer removal.

In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that the “relating to” requirement in 28 U.S.C. § 1442 should be interpreted broadly, allowing removal where the challenged conduct bears a close relationship to activities performed under federal direction—even if those federally directed activities are not themselves the subject of the lawsuit.

The decision reinforces federal officer removal as a powerful tool for government contractors and other companies performing federally directed work. While the Court confirmed the breadth of federal officer removal, it stopped short of providing access to the federal forum for all litigants. Instead, the court limited the broad sweep of “related to” jurisdiction by holding that the connection between the challenged conduct and the federal activity be a “close relationship” rather than “a tenuous, remote, or peripheral one.”

Therefore, the decision should not be viewed as a panacea to all state court defendants with hopes of removal. However, for those who meet the criteria, this is an important opinion on the path to federal court.