SECTION II.—JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS.

Clause 1.—Extent.

The judicial power shall extend to all cases,[1] in law and equity,[2] arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made or which shall be made, under their authority;[3] to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls;[4] to all cases of admiralty jurisdiction;[5] to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;[6] to controversies between two or more states;[7] between a state and citizens of another state;[8] between citizens of different states;[9] between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states;[10] and between a state or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.[11]_

[1] The courts decide what the law is, whether a specified law is constitutional or not, and what the meaning of constitutional provisions is, but only as these questions arise in cases brought before them for trial. They do not advise congress or the president as to the constitutionality or unconstitutionally of a law. They do not directly make law. But in determining the meaning of certain laws and of constitutional provisions they may determine what the law is, and thus they may be said to make law indirectly. But sometimes a legal question or a question as to the meaning of a constitutional provision remains for a long time unanswered, because no case involving the question comes before the courts.

[2] Sometimes the law provides no adequate remedy for a wrong. Here is the necessity for a court of equity. For instance, A sells his business to B, agreeing not to become a rival, but immediately reopens in the next block. B's only remedy in law is to secure damages. If this remedy is shown to be inadequate, a court of equity will close A's store. Or if C, having contracted to do a certain act for D, fails or declines to perform his part, the law can only award D damages; equity will compel the fulfillment of the contract. Law is curative, equity is preventive. (See Dole, 502.)

In some states there are separate courts of law and of equity. But the provision under discussion gives the United States courts jurisdiction in cases both of law and of equity. "There are no juries in equity cases, and no criminal trials."

[3] These pertain to the whole United States, so cases arising under them should be tried by a national, not by a state, court.

[4] Thus showing respect for the governments represented by them.

[5] That is, to cases arising on the high seas or on navigable waters. These matters, according also to I. 8: 10, 11, are under the jurisdiction of the United States, and therefore this provision is simply a consequence of the two referred to.

[6] Because then the interests of the whole country are at stake, and should not be left to any state.

[7] Because the United States was organized to "insure domestic tranquility."

[8] This provision has been modified by the eleventh amendment, which reads as follows: "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." That is, if the state is the plaintiff, the suit may be tried by the United States Supreme Court (compare clause 2). Claims of individuals against a state, if denied by the auditor, may be referred by them to the legislature. A state cannot be sued by an individual or corporation.

When a citizen is sued he must be sued either in the courts of the United States or in those of his own state. It would be a source of irritation to compel a state to sue a citizen of another state in the courts of his own state, hence this provision that such suits shall be in the United States court.

[9] To remove temptation to injustice through local prejudice. But the suit is tried in, and in accordance with the laws of, the state of which the defendant is a citizen.

[10] Because the states are involved in the suit, and it would be unfair to let either decide the controversy.

This provision is not of much importance now, because state boundaries are clearly defined. But when the constitution was framed, this kind of question meant a good deal. The charters given during colonial times were very loosely drawn, and claims of different colonies and proprietors overlapped each other. The question of ownership had not been settled at the time of the revolution. During the formative or confederation period, these disputes had been a source of much ill-feeling.

[11] Because the general government, and not the individual states, has charge of our foreign relations. A foreign country holds the United States responsible for the acts of its citizens; and only the United States can be looked to, to secure justice to its citizens on the part of foreign countries or citizens.

Clause 2.—Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction.[1] In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction,[2] both as to law and fact, with such exceptions and under such regulations as the congress shall make.[3]

[1] That is, such a suit must commence in the Supreme Court, and so cannot be tried elsewhere.

[2] That is, the action must commence in some lower court, but it may be appealed to the Supreme Court.

The U.S. District Court has jurisdiction over crimes committed on the high seas, and over admiralty cases in general; over crimes cognizable by the authority of the United States (not capital) committed within the district, and over cases in bankruptcy.

The U.S. Circuit Court has original jurisdiction in civil suits involving $2000 or more, over equity cases, and over cases arising under patent and copyright laws.

[3] To relieve the Supreme Court, which was years behind with its work, congress recently provided for a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in each of the nine circuits, which has final appellate jurisdiction in nearly all cases except those involving the constitutionality of a law.

Clause 3.—The Trial of Crimes.

The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury,[1] and such trial shall be held in the state where said crimes shall have been committed;[4] but when not committed within any state,[3] the trial shall be at such place or places as congress may by law have directed.[4]

[1] A trial by jury is a trial by twelve men impartially selected. This is regarded as one of the great bulwarks of liberty.

Civil cases may, at the desire of both parties, be tried by the court only. But for criminal trials a jury is guaranteed by this provision. In a criminal trial, the state or the nation is the prosecutor, and state or national judges might be tempted to decide unjustly, if the matter were left to them.

[2] This leaves the accused in better condition to defend himself, than if he could be taken away far from home. He is thus able at the least expense to bring witnesses in his own behalf. In harmony with this, each state has at least one U. S. District Court for the trial of crimes against the general government. (See Declaration of Independence.)

This provision is probably binding also upon the states.

[3] That is, in the District of Columbia, in one of the territories, in the Indian country, in the forts or arsenals of the United States, or upon the high seas.

[4] Congress has specified courts for the trial of such crimes. Those committed on the high seas are tried in the state where the vessel arrives. (See pages 230-4.)