From: stephen@sprunk.org   
      
   On 03-Dec-15 13:56, henhanna@gmail.com wrote:   
   > I thought this was mainly a [personal jurisdiction] issue (case), but   
   > the excerpts (from the linked pages in my OP (original post)) suggest   
   > that there's more to it than that. (govt immunity)   
   >   
   > In this opinion   
   > http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/09/26/11-15458.pdf   
   >  For some reason, they say [subj matter jurisdiction] and not   
   > [personal jurisdiction]   
      
   Federal courts only have subject-matter jurisdiction when it was given   
   to them explicitly, either by the Constitution or by Congress.   
      
   Congress only gave them jurisdiction over foreign sovereigns in very   
   specific circumstances, none of which applied here.  Therefore, they   
   lacked subject matter--not personal--jurisdiction.   
      
   They _did_ appear to have personal and territorial jurisdiction, but   
   without subject-matter jurisdiction too, that was moot.   
      
   S   
      
   --   
   Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein   
   CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the   
   K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)