Federal Arbitration Act

After the hotel ended his employment in March 2020, Jules sued in federal district court in New York, alleging that respondents had unlawfully discriminated against him in violation of federal and state law.

Citing an arbitration agreement Jules had signed before beginning work at the hotel, respondents obtained a stay of the federal case pending arbitration under Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act.

The arbitrator ruled against Jules on all of his claims, and when the parties returned to the same district court, respondents moved to confirm the award under Section 9, while Jules Cross moved to vacate it under Section 10, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction because those motions presented no federal question and the parties were not diverse.

The question presented was whether a federal court that initially exercises jurisdiction and stays a case pending arbitration maintains jurisdiction over a post-arbitration Section 9 or 10 application where jurisdiction would otherwise be lacking.

The court held, a federal court that has previously stayed claims in a pending action under Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act has jurisdiction to confirm or vacate a resulting arbitral award on those claims, as prescribed in Section 9 and Section 10 of that act.

Because the court had jurisdiction over the original claims and did not lose it while the case was stayed, nothing in the Federal Arbitration Act precludes the normal operation of federal jurisdiction over live claims still pending before a federal court.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is affirmed.

Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion for a unanimous court.

And, as always, we'll begin with the syllabus.

The Federal Arbitration Act requires courts to enforce many private arbitration agreements, but it also provides that nothing in the law shall be used to compel arbitration in disputes involving the contracts of employment of any class of workers engaged in interstate commerce .

This case poses the question whether someone can qualify as a worker under the Section 1 exemption if he never crosses state lines and never interacts with vehicles that do.

Flowers Foods Inc. is a large producer of packaged baked goods with bakeries in 19 states.

The statutory text cannot support such a rule.

Justice Gorsuch delivered the opinion for a unanimous court.

The Federal Arbitration Act requires courts to enforce many private arbitration agreements, but not all.

Section 1 of the Act provides that nothing in the law shall be used to compel arbitration in disputes involving the contracts of employment of any class of workers engaged in interstate commerce.