On Friday, May 16, 2014 6:27:19 PM UTC-4, Stephen Sprunk wrote:   
      
   > However, one can fairly easily _manufacture_ a federal controversy to   
   > give federal courts jurisdiction; today this is generally done via the   
   > 14th Amd, but prior to that diversity cases were common as well.   
      
   Heck, for decades there has been a ton of federal cases based on the 14th   
   Amendment.   
      
   _IMHO_, that has been greatly overused, far beyond the bounds of   
   reasonableness and common sense.  The result has been lopsided court orders   
   creating expensive burdens for industry and government in day to day   
   operations.  That extensive usage has    
   inspried considerable conservative sentiment for folks like Reagan, the tea   
   party, etc.   
      
   Here's an on-topic example:   
      
   SEPTA required all applicants to be a railroad police officer to be able to   
   run a mile in a set time.  Women sued the Authority claiming it discriminated   
   against them, even though some women had passed the test and there are women   
   transit cops.  The case    
   has been bouncing back and forth in appellant courts for years. IMHO, it was a   
   reasonable job requirement and that it could be litigated was stupid.     
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)