A woman sues her former employer in state court, asserting age and sex discrimination under both state and federal law. The employer removes the case to federal court. The employer’s counsel moves to remand. How should the federal court proceed?

• A. Remand the entire case.
• B. Remand the state claims but keep the federal claims.
• C. Retain the case to avoid potential bias against the plaintiff’s attorney.
• D. Retain the case because removal was timely and federal claims exist.

Answer: (C)

When a case containing a federal question is removed to federal court, the federal court has jurisdiction over the federal claim and, under supplemental jurisdiction, can hear related state-law claims as part of the same case. Here, the plaintiff pleads discrimination under both federal and state law, so removal is proper: the federal court has original jurisdiction over the federal claim (28 U.S.C. §1331) and can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claims (28 U.S.C. §1367). Because the federal claim remains, the court should retain and adjudicate the entire action in federal court rather than remanding the state claims. There’s no basis to remand to avoid perceived bias, since judicial impartiality is assumed. The correct approach is to keep the case in federal court and decide both the federal and state claims.