Did I answer the question about removal from state to federal court properly?

Question:

Susan Price, from Arkansas, sues Stuff-Mart in state court in Arkansas. Stuff-Mart is incorporated in Arkansas, and its principal place of business is in Arkansas. Price's lawsuit alleges that Stuff-Mart violated her rights under a federal civil rights law. May Stuff-Mart remove the case to federal district court?

My Answer:

Susan Price, a resident of Arkansas sued Stuff-Mart, a company that is incorporated in Arkansas with Arkansas being its principal place of business, in an Arkansas state court alleging that Stuff-Mart violated her rights under a federal civil rights law. Assuming proper subject matter jurisdiction, Price may choose the court system in which to litigate by starting the action in either a federal or state court because "the plaintiff is master of his claim" (Glannon 2013, 123). However, Stuff-Mart wants to remove the case to federal district court, causing the state of Arkansas to lose jurisdiction. "The federal removal statutes allow the defendant, after the plaintiff has chosen a state court, to 'second-guess' that choice by 'removing' some types of cases from the state court to a federal court" (Glannon 2013, 123).

28 U.S.C 1441 addresses removal of cases from state to federal court. A defendant can only remove a case to federal court if it could have originally been filed in federal court and has subject matter jurisdiction over that case. (Liberty n.d., 0:55). However, an exception exists. "A civil action otherwise removable solely on the basis of the jurisdiction under section 1332(a) off this title [28 USC 1332(a)] may not be removed if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought." 28 U.S.C 1441(b)(2). The "Hometown Rule" precludes diversity cases to be removed because the defendant "is a citizen of the state in which the action is brought." (Liberty n.d., 1:10).

Both Price and Stuff-Mart are residents of Arkansas. Neither are likely to face prejudice in Arkansas state court. However, Price is seeking relief under federal law, the case could have originally been brought in federal court, and the federal court would have subject matter jurisdiction. This is not a diversity case; therefore, 28 U.S.C 1441(b)(2) would not apply. Since Price's claim is a federal matter, removal is proper.