Supreme Court Decides Jules v. Andre Balazs Properties

On May 14, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a unanimous decision in Jules v. Andre Balazs Properties, No. 25-83, holding that where a federal court has jurisdiction over a case and stays the proceedings pending arbitration under Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), the court will have jurisdiction to decide later motions filed under Sections 9 or 10 to confirm or vacate a resulting arbitral award.

Petitioner filed state and federal claims in federal district court. Respondent moved to stay the proceedings and compel arbitration pursuant to an agreement between the parties. The district court stayed the proceedings, and Petitioner then commenced arbitration. Respondent prevailed on all claims in the arbitration and moved under Section 9 to confirm the arbitration award in the same district court that stayed the case. Petitioner cross-moved to vacate the award under Section 10, arguing that the district court did not have either federal question or diversity jurisdiction to confirm the award.

The district court rejected Petitioner's arguments and confirmed the award. The Second Circuit affirmed, reasoning that a district court that stays proceedings pending arbitration under Section 3 will have jurisdiction to confirm an award regardless of whether the district court has an independent jurisdictional basis over the Section 9 and Section 10 proceedings.

The Supreme Court affirmed. The Court held that while the FAA does not itself create federal jurisdiction, because the district court had federal question jurisdiction over the case under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 before staying the proceedings, the district retained jurisdiction to rule on the Section 9 and 10 motions, which were a part of that same case.

The Court distinguished these facts from "freestanding" FAA motions brought in federal court, where the original proceedings were not before the district court and Section 9 and 10 motions marked the parties' first visit to that court, as is the case where parties proceed directly to arbitration.

Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.