[1][2][3] The Supreme Court's 2009 Iqbal case elaborated the heightened standard of pleading it established two years previously in Twombly, and established that it was generally applicable in all federal civil litigation and not limited to antitrust law: Two working principles underlie our decision in Twombly.
First, the tenet that a court must accept as true all of the allegations contained in a complaint is inapplicable to legal conclusions.
In keeping with these principles a court considering a motion to dismiss can choose to begin by identifying pleadings that, because they are no more than conclusions, are not entitled to the assumption of truth.
When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.
After Iqbal was decided, expanding Twombly's reach beyond antitrust law, legislation was introduced to reverse the cases and re-introduce "notice pleading";[4] neither bill passed.