Minnesota inmate Leon Carter appeals from the order of the District Court 1 dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The District Court concluded that Carter failed to state an Eighth Amendment claim, and the court declined to exercise jurisdiction over Carter’s state-law claims. After careful de novo review, we affirm for the reasons given by the District Court. See Blankenship v. USA Truck, Inc., 601 F.3d 852, 853 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to *579 state a claim, accepting the allegations in the complaint as true and affording the plaintiff all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those allegations); see also Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004) (explaining that pro se complaints are to be liberally construed but noting that “they still must allege sufficient facts to support the claims advanced”).