Supreme Court Backs Federal Jurisdiction Over FAA Awards in 9-0 Ruling
Updated
Updated · The National Law Review · May 14
Supreme Court Backs Federal Jurisdiction Over FAA Awards in 9-0 Ruling
14 articles · Updated · The National Law Review · May 14
A 9-0 Supreme Court ruling said federal courts that stayed claims under Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act keep jurisdiction to confirm or vacate the resulting arbitration award.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that a court with original jurisdiction over the underlying claims does not lose that authority while the case is paused for arbitration, and nothing in the FAA strips it away.
Jules v. Andre Balazs Properties arose from an employment-discrimination dispute, and the court affirmed the Second Circuit's holding that the district court could confirm the award.
The decision clarifies a murky jurisdiction question after the court's recent FAA rulings, especially where motions under Sections 9 or 10 lack an independent basis for federal jurisdiction.
Will the Supreme Court's broker ruling actually improve road safety, or just raise prices on everything we buy?
With brokers now facing 'nuclear verdicts,' is the freight industry sitting on an uninsured financial time bomb?
Supreme Court’s 2026 Montgomery Ruling Ends Federal Preemption, Exposes Freight Brokers to State Negligent Hiring Lawsuits
Overview
On May 14, 2026, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that state negligent-hiring claims against freight brokers are not blocked by federal law, allowing these lawsuits to move forward in lower courts. This decision, based on the FAAAA’s safety exception, marks a major shift in liability for the freight brokerage industry. The Court clarified that federal deregulation was never meant to remove accountability for safety-related negligence. As a result, freight brokers now face greater responsibility and must show due diligence in their hiring practices, giving injured plaintiffs a new path to seek recovery when accidents occur.