In response to:
Something that Ann forgot to mention is that Article 3, Section 2 of the Constitution lays out the powers of the federal judiciary, just like Article 1, Section 8 does for Congress.
Article 3, Section 2 does NOT mention state law. It mentions cases involving the Constitution itself, Federal Law, Treaties, Ambassadors and such, maritime jurisdiction, suits involving the Federal Government, and suits involving two or more states or the people therein, or US citizens and foreign governments. The 11th Amendment removed the Federal Bench's jurisdiction over suits against a state by the citizen of another state or a foriegn state.
The reason tea partiers carried signs saying "Read the Constitution!" was that we were hoping people would read the Constitution.
Alas, we still have Rick Santorum saying Obamacare is the same as what he calls "Romneycare"; the otherwise brilliant Mickey Kaus sniffing that if states can mandate insurance purchases, then we're "not talking about some basic individual liberty to not purchase stuff" (no, just the nation's founding document, which protects "basic individual liberties" by putting constraints on Congress); and the former law professor, Barack Obama, alleging that a "good example" of judicial activism would be the Supreme Court (in his...
Read Robert Bork. Read Thomas Sowell.
Actually, the one comment here I can't quite understand is DHE's. I'd be really interested to know what reading he thinks would be instructive.
The reason for your question is that we have drifted, inch by relentless inch, so far from the original intention of the framers that some of the basic questions no longer seem to apply. But they should. That's the point.
"The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects."
“In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.”
Then there is the (related) 11th Amendment:
“The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.”
It is not that I disagree with Happy Jake, but I believe that a dialog on the topic is timely.