From: stephen@sprunk.org   
      
   On 20-May-14 13:13, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:   
   > 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.   
      
   Um, no.  The result is the same, except in cases where state courts have   
   not been as good at protecting their citizens as the federal courts   
   have; in fact, that is the main reason people _want_ to get their cases   
   into the federal courts: the state courts failed to protect them.   
      
   If it weren't for that, segregation and even lynching would still be   
   legal, as would many other forms of minority oppression that are, in   
   many cases, still tolerated by state courts.  They do occasionally go   
   too far, but on the whole, we're a lot better off this way.   
      
   > 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.   
      
   That's squarely in the federal courts due to the federal equal   
   employment opportunity laws, not manufactured jurisdiction via the 14th Amd.   
      
   A better example is free speech.  Most states have free speech rights in   
   their own constitution, so you _could_ legislate such cases in state   
   court, but if that fails (or you just want to save time), one can also   
   go to a federal court under the US 1st Amd, which was incorporated to   
   the states under the 14th Amd.   
      
   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)