A husband from State A files for divorce against his wife, a citizen of State B, in a federal court in State A. The wife waits two years, then moves to dismiss arguing lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Should the court grant the motion?

A husband from State A files for divorce against his wife, a citizen of State B, in a federal court in State A. The wife waits two years, then moves to dismiss arguing lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Should the court grant the motion?

• A. No, because the motion to dismiss was not timely.
• B. No, because she waived any affirmative defenses by answering the complaint.
• C. Yes, because the federal court in State A lacks subject-matter jurisdiction.
• D. Yes, because the district court in State A lacks personal jurisdiction.

Answer: (B)

Domestic-relations actions like divorce are generally outside federal subject-matter jurisdiction because of the domestic-relations exception. Here the action is a divorce between spouses filed in a federal court sitting in State A, involving purely matrimonial issues with one spouse from State A and the other from State B. Because the dispute is essentially about dissolving a marriage, the federal court cannot exercise jurisdiction over it, so the court should dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The two-year delay in raising the issue does not create federal jurisdiction, and lack of SMJ may be raised at any time. Personal jurisdiction over the parties isn’t the issue here; the problem is whether Congress authorized the federal courts to hear this kind of domestic-relations claim at all.

Domestic-relations actions like divorce are generally outside federal subject-matter jurisdiction because of the domestic-relations exception. Here the action is a divorce between spouses filed in a federal court sitting in State A, involving purely matrimonial issues with one spouse from State A and the other from State B. Because the dispute is essentially about dissolving a marriage, the federal court cannot exercise jurisdiction over it, so the court should dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The two-year delay in raising the issue does not create federal jurisdiction, and lack of SMJ may be raised at any time. Personal jurisdiction over the parties isn’t the issue here; the problem is whether Congress authorized the federal courts to hear this kind of domestic-relations claim at all.