4. Under Mottley, plaintiff has the burden of alleging the federal issue as an element of her claim; if the federal issue is assigned to defendant as an affirmative defense, federal jurisdiction cannot be asserted. Why was federal jurisdiction not present on the face of the Mottley’s complaint? Is it that plaintiff alleged an anticipated federal defense? What was that defense? The American Law Institute’s Study of the Division of Jurisdiction Between State299and Federal Courts, published in 1969, proposed a reform never adopted that would permit retention of jurisdiction whenever defendant has introduced a federal defense or a federal counterclaim. See Doernberg, There’s No Reason for It; It’s Just Our Policy: Why the Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule Sabotages the Purposes of Federal Question Jurisdiction, 38 Hastings L.J. 597 (1987). What problems might arise from adoption of the ALI proposal?