Article III, Section 2, Clause 1

The Federalist and Federalist essays

• cited bySuggested
  Aristides, ¶ 49

  Caſes between two or more ſtates. 3. Caſes between a ſtate, and its own citizens. 4. Caſes between a ſtate, and the citizens of another ſtate. 5. Caſes between a ſtate, and a foreign ſtate. 6.

  The paragraph divides the cases in which a state is a party into heads (between states, between a state and citizens of another state, between a state and a foreign state), which follow the list of controversies in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• quoted bySuggested
  Aristides, ¶ 51

  To all caſes whatever between parties of every kind, in law and equity, ariſing under this conſtitution, and the laws of congreſs, paſſed agreeably thereto, and to treaties already, or hereafter to be, made.

  The paragraph, listing the appellate jurisdiction of the supreme court, reproduces the words "in law and equity, arising under this constitution" from Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• cited bySuggested
  Aristides, ¶ 52

  To all caſes of admiralty or maritime juriſdiction.

  The paragraph lists cases of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction, as Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 does.

• cited bySuggested
  Aristides, ¶ 53

  To all caſes, in which the United States ſhall be a party.

  The paragraph lists cases in which the United States is a party, as Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 does.

• cited bySuggested
  Aristides, ¶ 54

  To all caſes between citizens of different ſtates.

  The paragraph lists cases between citizens of different states, as Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 does.

• cited bySuggested
  Aristides, ¶ 55

  To all caſes between citizens of the ſame ſtate, claiming lands under the grants of different ſtates.

  The paragraph lists cases between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, as Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 does.

• cited bySuggested
  Aristides, ¶ 56

  To all caſes between citizens of a ſtate, and foreign ſtates, or their citizens or ſubjects.

  The paragraph lists cases between a state's citizens and foreign states or their citizens or subjects, as Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 does.

• cited bySuggested
  Citizen of New Haven 2, ¶ 16

  All cases in the courts of common law between citizens of the same state, except those claiming lands under grants of different states, must be finally decided by courts of the state to which they belong, so that it is not probable that more than one citizen to a thousand will ever…

  The paragraph echoes the words of the judicial power clause on citizens of the same state "claiming lands under grants of different states".

• cited bySuggested
  An American Citizen, Number IV, ¶ 11

  But when a diſpute ariſes between the citizens of any ſtate about lands lying out of the bounds thereof, or when a trial is to be had between the citizens of any ſtate and thoſe of another, or the government of another, the private citizen will not be obliged to go into a court conſtituted by the ſtate, with which, or with the citizens of which, his diſpute is.

  The paragraph lists the disputes that may go to a federal court: lands outside a state's bounds, and trials between citizens of different states or with a foreign government. These are among the controversies listed in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• cited bySuggested
  Landholder 6, ¶ 8

  It extends only to objects and cases specified, and wherein the national peace or rights, or the harmony of the states is concerned, and not to controversies between citizens of the same state (except where they claim under grants of different states) ; and nothing hinders but the supreme federal court may be held in different districts, or in all the states, and that all the cases, except the few in which…

  Describes the extent of the federal judiciary, naming the exception for citizens of the same state claiming under grants of different states, a category listed in this clause.

• quoted bySuggested
  A Native of Virginia, Article III, ¶ 2

  The judicial power ſhall extend to all caſes, in la• 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 publi• Miniſters and Conſuls; to all caſes of admiralty and maritime juriſdiction; to controverſies to which the United States ſhal• be a party;…

  The paragraph prints Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution as signed; the quoted words are the same as the clause's (apart from capitals and the long s), though the pamphlet's punctuation differs in places.

• cited bySuggested
  A Native of Virginia, Article III, ¶ 8

  THE only queſtion then is, whether the enumeration of the caſes aſſigned to the Federal Court, by this article, is likely to produce oppreſſion?

  The paragraph asks whether "the enumeration of the cases assigned to the Federal Court, by this article," is likely to produce oppression; the enumeration is the list of cases in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• cited bySuggested
  A Native of Virginia, Article III, ¶ 9

  In theſe caſes, in controverſies between two or more States, and between a State and citizens of another State, and between citizens of the •ame claiming lands under grants of different States, the preſent Congreſs have the right of determining.

  The paragraph lists controversies between two or more states, between a state and citizens of another state, and between citizens claiming lands under grants of different states, which are among those in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• cited bySuggested
  A Native of Virginia, Article III, ¶ 11

  …controverſies, there is but one poſſible caſe where a diſpute between two citizens of the ſame State can be carried, even by appeal, to the Federal Court; and that is, when they claim the ſame land under grants from different States.

  The paragraph discusses the one case in which a dispute between citizens of the same state can go to the federal court, when they claim the same land under grants from different states, which is in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• cited bySuggested
  A Native of Virginia, Article III, ¶ 14

  SEVERAL reaſons occur why the Federal Court ſhould poſſeſs an appellate juriſdiction in controverſies between foreigners and citizens, and between the citizens of different States.

  The paragraph gives reasons why the Federal Court should have jurisdiction in controversies between foreigners and citizens and between citizens of different states, which are among those in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• cited bySuggested
  Remarks on the New Plan, ¶ 6

  If there is a single new case that can be exceptional, it is that between a Foreigner and a Citizen, or that between the Citizens of different States.

  Discussing the objects to be submitted to the national judiciary, the paragraph names the cases between a foreigner and a citizen and between citizens of different states, echoing the list of controversies in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• quoted byReviewed
  Federalist No. 80, ¶ 12

  It is to comprehend “all cases in law and equity arising under the 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 and grants of different States; and between a State or the citizens thereof and foreign states, citizens, and subjects.” This constitutes the entire mass of the judicial authority of the Union.

  The paragraph quotes this clause in full in quotation marks as "the particular powers" of the judiciary "according to the plan of the convention."

• quoted byReviewed
  Federalist No. 80, ¶ 13

  To all cases in law and equity, ARISING UNDER THE CONSTITUTION and THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES. This corresponds with the two first classes of causes, which have been enumerated, as proper for the jurisdiction of the United States.

  First item in the paper's review in detail of the clause quoted in the preceding paragraph, repeating its words on cases "arising under the Constitution" and "the laws of the United States."

• cited bySuggested
  Federalist No. 80, ¶ 14

  It has also been asked, what need of the word “equity What equitable causes can grow out of the Constitution and laws of the United States?

  Takes up the word "equity" in the clause under review, putting the word in quotation marks.

• quoted byReviewed
  Federalist No. 80, ¶ 16

  To treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, and to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls. These belong to the fourth class of the enumerated cases, as they have an evident connection with the preservation of the national peace.

  Second item in the paper's review of the extent of the judicial power under this clause, repeating its words on treaties and "all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls."

• quoted byReviewed
  Federalist No. 80, ¶ 17

  To cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. These form, altogether, the fifth of the enumerated classes of causes proper for the cognizance of the national courts.

  Third item in the paper's review of the extent of the judicial power under this clause, repeating its words on "cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction."

• quoted byReviewed
  Federalist No. 80, ¶ 18

  To controversies to which the United States shall be a party. These constitute the third of those classes.

  Fourth item in the paper's review of the extent of the judicial power under this clause, repeating its words on "controversies to which the United States shall be a party."

• quoted byReviewed
  Federalist No. 80, ¶ 19

  To controversies between two or more States; between a State and citizens of another State; between citizens of different States. These belong to the fourth of those classes, and partake, in some measure, of the nature of the last.

  Fifth item in the paper's review of the extent of the judicial power under this clause, repeating its words on controversies between States and between citizens of different States.

• quoted byReviewed
  Federalist No. 80, ¶ 20

  To cases between the citizens of the same State, CLAIMING LANDS UNDER GRANTS OF DIFFERENT STATES. These fall within the last class, and ARE THE ONLY INSTANCES IN WHICH THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION DIRECTLY CONTEMPLATES THE COGNIZANCE OF DISPUTES BETWEEN THE CITIZENS OF THE SAME STATE.

  Sixth item in the paper's review of the extent of the judicial power under this clause, repeating in capitals its words "claiming lands under grants of different States."

• quoted byReviewed
  Federalist No. 80, ¶ 21

  To cases between a State and the citizens thereof, and foreign States, citizens, or subjects. These have been already explained to belong to the fourth of the enumerated classes, and have been shown to be, in a peculiar manner, the proper subjects of the national…

  Seventh item in the paper's review of the extent of the judicial power under this clause, repeating its words on cases between a State or its citizens "and foreign States, citizens, or subjects."

• cited bySuggested
  Federalist No. 82, ¶ 7

  …the next place, that “the JUDICIAL POWER of the United States SHALL BE VESTED in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as Congress shall ordain and establish”; and it then proceeds to enumerate the cases to which this judicial power shall extend.

  Following the plan through in order, the paragraph names the next clause as the one that will "enumerate the cases to which this judicial power shall extend," echoing its words "The judicial Power shall extend."

• cited bySuggested
  Federalist No. 83, ¶ 11

  All land causes, except where claims under the grants of different States come into question, and all other controversies between the citizens of the same State, unless where they depend upon positive violations of the articles of union, by acts of the State legislatures, will belong exclusively to the jurisdiction of the State tribunals.

  In saying which causes the national judiciary will not hear, the paragraph excepts claims to land "under the grants of different States" between citizens of the same State, echoing this clause's words.

Anti-Federalist essays

• quoted bySuggested
  Agrippa 13, ¶ 4

  In article III, section 2, it is declared, that "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." Among the cases arising under this new constitution are reckoned, " all controversies between citizens of different states," which include all kinds of civil causes between those parties.

  The paragraph names "article III, section 2" and quotes the opening of its first clause in quotation marks.

• cited bySuggested
  Agrippa 18, ¶ 7

  Congress shall not have power to try causes between a state and citizens of another state, nor between citizens of different states; nor to make any laws relative to the transfer of property between those parties, nor any other matter which shall originate in the body of any state.

  This proposed condition names two categories of jurisdiction in the words of Article III, Section 2, clause 1: causes between a state and citizens of another state, and between citizens of different states.

• cited bySuggested
  Agrippa 5, ¶ 2

  Causes of all kinds, between citizens of different states, are to be tried before a continental court.

  The paragraph names the federal courts' jurisdiction over causes between citizens of different states, one of the categories listed in Article III, Section 2, clause 1.

• cited bySuggested
  Agrippa 5, ¶ 3

  Authority is also given to the continental courts, to try all causes between a state and its own citizens.

  The paragraph names the grant to the federal courts of causes between a state and citizens; controversies between a state and citizens are listed in Article III, Section 2, clause 1, and the next paragraph calls this "the clause relating to causes between the state and individuals."

• cited bySuggested
  Agrippa 7, ¶ 5

  The lands in New Hampshire having been formerly granted by this state, and afterwards by that state, to private persons, the whole authority of trying titles becomes vested in a continental court, and that state loses a branch of authority, which the others retain, over their own citizens.

  The paragraph describes federal jurisdiction over land titles held under grants of two different states, a category listed in Article III, Section 2, clause 1.

• quoted bySuggested
  Brutus 1, ¶ 10

  The powers of these courts are very extensive ; their jurisdiction comprehends all civil causes, except such as arise between citizens of the same State ; and it extends to all cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution.

  Describing the jurisdiction of the federal courts, the paragraph reproduces the words of Article III, Section 2, clause 1, "all cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution".

• cited bySuggested
  Centinel 16, ¶ 2

  The ist section of 3d article gives the supreme court cognizance of not only the laws, but of all cases arising under the constitution, which empowers this tribunal to decide upon the construction of the constitution itself in the last resort.

  The paragraph describes the provision extending the judicial power to "all cases arising under the constitution" and the laws, words found in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1; it numbers it as the first section of the third article, so the reviewer should note the numbering differs from the clause linked.

• quoted bySuggested
  Centinel 1, ¶ 15

  The judicial power by Article 3d sect, ist 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,…

  The paragraph reproduces the whole list of the judicial power's objects from Article III, Section 2, Clause 1, although it labels the passage "Article 3d sect, ist."

• cited bySuggested
  Centinel 2, ¶ 16

  The jurisdiction of the federal court goes, likewise, to the laws to be created by treaties, made by the President and Senate (a species of legislation) with other nations; "to all cases affecting foreign ministers and consuls; to controversies wherein the United States shall be a party; to controversies between citizens of different states," as when an inhabitant of New York has a demand on an inhabitant of New Jersey.

  The paragraph gives in quotation marks a close but not exact version of heads of federal jurisdiction from Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 ("foreign ministers" and "wherein" differ from the clause).

• quoted bySuggested
  Federal Farmer 3, ¶ 19

  By Art. 3, Sec. 2. the powers of the federal judiciary are extended (among other things) to all cases between a state and citizens of another state — between citizens of different states — between a state or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects. Actions in all these cases, except against a state government, are now brought and finally [26] determined in the law courts of the states respectively and as there are no…

  Cites "Art. 3, Sec. 2" and quotes, without quotation marks, three of the clause's heads of jurisdiction, omitting the one on lands claimed under grants of different states.

• cited bySuggested
  Federal Farmer 3, ¶ 20

  …can be but one supreme court in which the final jurisdiction will centre in all federal causes — except in cases where appeals by law shall not be allowed : The judicial powers of the federal courts extend in law and equity to certain cases : and, therefore, the powers to determine on the law, in equity, and as to the fact, all will concentrate in the supreme court: — These powers, which by this…

  Says the judicial powers "extend in law and equity to certain cases," echoing this clause's "shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity."

• cited bySuggested
  Federal Farmer 3, ¶ 21

  How far it may be proper to admit a foreigner or the citizen of another state to bring actions against state governments, which have "failed in performing so many, promises made during the war is doubtful : How far it may be proper so to humble a state, as to oblige…

  Discusses the new jurisdiction allowing "a foreigner or the citizen of another state to bring actions against state governments," the heads of jurisdiction in this clause cited in FederalFarmer.3.19.

• cited bySuggested
  James Monroe, ¶ 36

  …extent therefore of the duties which become the excluſive object of a foederal court, may give ſome inſight into that eſtabliſhment they might probably adopt; and when we obſerve that the cognizance of all caſes ariſing under the conſtitution and the laws, either of a civil or criminal nature, in law or equity, with thoſe other objects which it ſpecifies, even between the citizens of the ſame ſtate, are taken from thoſe of each ſtate and abſolutely appropriated to the courts of…

  The paragraph describes the jurisdiction of the federal courts over "all cases arising under the constitution and the laws ... in law or equity" and between citizens of the same state, which is the list of cases in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• quoted bySuggested
  Sydney 2, ¶ 12

  2nd," The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity." To have in various instances an original and exclusive, in others a concurrent jurisdiction, and the supreme court in many cases an appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and…

  The paragraph cites "sec. 2nd" of Article III and quotes the opening words of its first clause in quotation marks.

Other writings

• quoted bySuggested
  North Carolina convention, July 29, 1788, ¶ 8

  If I understand the gentleman right, his objection was not to the defined jurisdiction, but to the general jurisdiction, which is expressed thus: “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;” and also the appellate jurisdiction in some instances.

  Davie quotes "the general jurisdiction ... expressed thus".

• cited bySuggested
  North Carolina convention, July 29, 1788, ¶ 10

  It has been equally ceded, by the strongest opposers to this government, that the federal courts should have cognizance of controversies between two or more states, between a state and the citizens of another state, and between the citizens of the same state claiming lands under the grant of different states.

  The speaker lists the federal courts' jurisdiction over controversies between states, a state and citizens of another state, and citizens claiming lands under grants of different states, in the clause's words.

• quoted bySuggested
  Pennsylvania convention, December 7, 1787, ¶ 11

  Let us examine this: “The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution and the laws of the United States.” Controversies may certainly arise under this Constitution and the laws of the United States, and is it not proper that there should be…

  The speaker quotes the clause in quotation marks and calls it "the article respecting the judicial department".

• quoted bySuggested
  Pennsylvania convention, December 7, 1787, ¶ 12

  The judicial power extends to all cases arising under treaties made, or which shall be made, by the United States.

  The speaker says the judicial power extends to cases arising under treaties made or to be made, repeating the clause's words, but without quotation marks.

• quoted bySuggested
  Pennsylvania convention, December 7, 1787, ¶ 13

  The power of judges extends to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls.

  The speaker says the power of the judges "extends to" these cases, which matches the clause on the extent of the judicial power. The same words begin the next clause (original jurisdiction), so the choice rests on "extends to".

• quoted bySuggested
  Pennsylvania convention, December 7, 1787, ¶ 14

  This will also be allowed with regard to the following clause: “all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction.”

  The speaker quotes the next words of the clause in quotation marks.

• quoted bySuggested
  Pennsylvania convention, December 7, 1787, ¶ 15

  The next is, “to controversies to which the United States shall be a party.” Now, I apprehend it is something very incongruous, that, because the United States are a party, it should be urged, as an objection, that their judges ought not to…

  The speaker quotes the next words of the clause in quotation marks.

• quoted bySuggested
  Pennsylvania convention, December 7, 1787, ¶ 16

  “To controversies between two or more states.” This power is vested in the present Congress; but they are unable, as I have already shown, to enforce their decisions.

  The speaker quotes the next words of the clause in quotation marks.

• quoted bySuggested
  Pennsylvania convention, December 7, 1787, ¶ 17

  “Between a state and citizens of another state.” When this power is attended to, it will be found to be a necessary one.

  The speaker quotes the next words of the clause in quotation marks.

• quoted bySuggested
  Pennsylvania convention, December 7, 1787, ¶ 18

  “Between citizens of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens, or subjects.” This part of the jurisdiction, I presume, will occasion more doubt than any other part; and, at first view, it may seem exposed to objections well founded and of…

  The speaker quotes the next words of the clause in quotation marks, skipping the words about citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states.

• quoted bySuggested
  Virginia convention, June 19, 1788, ¶ 51

  “The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution.” What objects will not this expression extend to?

  The speaker quotes "The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution."

• quoted bySuggested
  Virginia convention, June 19, 1788, ¶ 58

  “All cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution, and the laws of the United States,” take in all the officers of the government.

  The speaker quotes "All cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution, and the laws of the United States".

• quoted bySuggested
  Virginia convention, June 19, 1788, ¶ 66

  “Controversies between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens, or subjects.” There is a confusion in this case.

  The speaker refers to "the last subject of its cognizance" and quotes "Controversies between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens, or subjects."

• quoted bySuggested
  Virginia convention, June 19, 1788, ¶ 65

  “To controversies between a state and the citizens of another state.” How will their jurisdiction in this case do?

  The speaker quotes "To controversies between a state and the citizens of another state."; the quoted words have "the" before "citizens", which the clause lacks.

• cited bySuggested
  Virginia convention, June 20, 1788, ¶ 28

  That it shall have cognizance of controversies between a state and citizens of another state, without discriminating between plaintiff and defendant.

  The speaker asks "What says the paper?" and answers "That it shall have cognizance of controversies between a state and citizens of another state".

• quoted bySuggested
  Virginia convention, June 21, 1788, ¶ 20

  It is, then, necessary that its jurisdiction should “extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution and the laws of the United States.”

  The speaker says the jurisdiction should "extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution and the laws of the United States", in quotation marks.

• cited bySuggested
  Virginia convention, June 21, 1788, ¶ 24

  It extends to all cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution.

  The speaker says the judiciary "extends to all cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution" and asks what is meant by "the words arising under the Constitution".

Debates in Congress

• quoted bySuggested
  House, August 18, 1789, ¶ 54

  strike out the words "Between a State and citizens of another State," &c.

  Following "Art. 3." in the preceding paragraph, the proposal names "Sect. 2. clause 1." and quotes its words "Between a State and citizens of another State".

• cited bySuggested
  House, December 8, 1803, ¶ 137

  If I were to point out the part of this Constitution which tends most to consolidation, I should lay my hand on the Judiciary. The giving to that department jurisdiction not only under Federal laws, but in cases between man and man, arising under the laws of a State, where one of the parties h a foreigner, or citizen of another State, and even between citizens of the same State under the bankrupt system, is the strongest feature of consolidation in this Government.

  The speaker names the part of the Constitution giving the Judiciary jurisdiction in cases where one party is a foreigner or a citizen of another State, which is Article III, Section 2, clause 1.

• quoted bySuggested
  House, January 31, 1865, ¶ 25

  Tht judicial power sliali extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution."

  The paragraph quotes Article III, Section 2, Clause 1: "The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution" ("sliali" is an OCR misreading).

• quoted bySuggested
  House, January 28, 1869 (3), ¶ 73

  …section two, article three, of the Constitution the judicial power of theUnited States so far as it is controlled by the personal status of the litigant is limited to controversies" between a State and citizens of another State, between citizens of different States, between citizens of the same State claiming lands under grants from different States, and between a State or the citizens thereof and foreign States, citizens, or subjects," so that it was up to the adoption of the fourteenth amendment impossible for a negro resident in a State that refused him the privileges of State citizenship to…

  The paragraph cites "section two, article three, of the Constitution" and quotes, in quotation marks, its list of controversies to which the judicial power extends.

• cited bySuggested
  House, June 21, 1911, ¶ 307

  In the recital of the judicial power of the United States there was a provision that it should extend to all suits between a State and its citizens or the citizens of a foreign State; and in the early case of Chisholm against Georgia, Justice Jay declared that under the Constitution a State could be brought to the bar of the court at the…

  The speaker names the provision in "the recital of the judicial power of the United States" extending it to suits against a State by citizens of another State or a foreign State, Article III, Section 2, Clause 1.

• quoted bySuggested
  Senate, February 8, 1869 (2), ¶ 334

  WHY TE I ask my friend from Missouri how he will explain that section of the Constitution section two, article three, which 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."

  The paragraph cites "section two, article three" of the Constitution and quotes the opening of its first clause.

The Supreme Court

Cases whose essays in the Constitution Annotated cite them under this clause, oldest first. Each link names the pages it comes from.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Marbury v. Madison (1803)5 U.S. 137, decided February 24, 1803

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 8 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.10.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.10.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.3.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.4.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.2, pp. 970, 989, 993, 1068, 1069, 1070, 1089, 1090.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee (1816)14 U.S. 304, decided March 20, 1816

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 4 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.11.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.12.1, pp. 1104, 1109, 1113, 1119.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Cohens v. Virginia (1821)19 U.S. 264, decided March 18, 1821

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 10 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.13.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.14.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.14.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.15.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.15.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.3.1, pp. 961, 966, 967, 1104, 1107, 1108, 1109, 1138, 1144, 1147.

• interpreted bySuggestedOverruled
  Osborn v. Bank of the United States (1824)22 U.S. 738, decided March 19, 1824

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 7 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.3.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.3.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.4.1, pp. 962, 967, 970, 1107, 1111, 1112, 1114.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Waring v. Clarke (1847)46 U.S. 441, decided March 18, 1847

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 5 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.11.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.12, ArtIII.S2.C1.12.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.12.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.12.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.12.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.12.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.12.7, pp. 1118, 1122, 1124, 1125, 1129.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Luther v. Borden (1849)48 U.S. 1, decided January 18, 1849

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 4 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.9.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.8, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.9, pp. 1071, 1072, 1076, 1082.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Massachusetts v. Mellon (1923)262 U.S. 447, decided June 4, 1923

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 9 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.10.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.14.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.15, ArtIII.S2.C1.15.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.3.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.6.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.6.4, pp. 968, 989, 993, 994, 1013, 1020, 1021, 1093, 1146.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority (1936)297 U.S. 288, decided February 17, 1936

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 13 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.10.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.10.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.10.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.10.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.10.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.3.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.4.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.4.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.5.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.5.4, pp. 963, 968, 972, 974, 978, 984, 985, 1086, 1092, 1093, 1094, 1097, 1100.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Erie Railroad v. Tompkins (1938)304 U.S. 64, decided April 25, 1938

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 6 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.10.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.16.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.16.7, pp. 1098, 1110, 1155, 1157, 1158, 1160.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Coleman v. Miller (1939)307 U.S. 433, decided June 5, 1939

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 4 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.6.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.4, pp. 964, 1026, 1027, 1073.

• interpreted bySuggestedOverruled
  Colegrove v. Green (1946)328 U.S. 549, decided June 10, 1946

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 2 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.9.4, pp. 1073, 1074.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Brown v. Board of Education (1954)347 U.S. 483, decided May 17, 1954

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 2 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.11.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.4, pp. 1106, 1110.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co. (1959)358 U.S. 354, decided February 24, 1959

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 8 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.11.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.12.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.12.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.18.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.18.3, pp. 1105, 1107, 1108, 1115, 1119, 1123, 1163, 1164.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Baker v. Carr (1962)369 U.S. 186, decided March 26, 1962

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 15 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.11.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.11.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.5.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.9, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.10, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.7, pp. 963, 979, 991, 1032, 1067, 1068, 1069, 1073, 1074, 1075, 1076, 1079, 1083, 1106, 1110.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Flast v. Cohen (1968)392 U.S. 83, decided June 10, 1968

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 12 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.3.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.3.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.4.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.4.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.4.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.5.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.5.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.5, pp. 962, 968, 970, 971, 973, 978, 981, 989, 990, 994, 1014, 1015.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Powell v. McCormack (1969)395 U.S. 486, decided June 16, 1969

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 5 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.6.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.8, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.9, pp. 1027, 1079, 1080, 1081, 1082.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Schlesinger v. Reservists Committee to Stop the War (1974)418 U.S. 208, decided June 25, 1974

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 8 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.5.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.9, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.1, pp. 963, 983, 989, 991, 1006, 1014, 1036, 1067.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Warth v. Seldin (1975)422 U.S. 490, decided June 25, 1975

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 12 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.5.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.6.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.1, pp. 984, 986, 987, 989, 992, 997, 1008, 1018, 1032, 1034, 1036, 1038.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Chadha (1983)462 U.S. 919, decided June 23, 1983

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 6 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.5.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.7, pp. 983, 984, 985, 986, 987, 1080.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Allen v. Wright (1984)468 U.S. 737, decided July 3, 1984

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 10 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.5.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.1, pp. 963, 984, 989, 998, 999, 1000, 1008, 1009, 1010, 1036.

• interpreted bySuggestedOverruled
  Davis v. Bandemer (1986)478 U.S. 109, decided June 30, 1986

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 3 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.10, ArtIII.S2.C1.10.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.10, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.11, pp. 1083, 1084, 1085.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992)504 U.S. 555, decided June 12, 1992

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 14 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.3, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.4.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.6.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.8, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.10, pp. 963, 988, 990, 998, 999, 1001, 1002, 1007, 1010, 1018, 1029, 1030, 1038, 1047.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Ohio Forestry Ass’n, Inc. v. Sierra Club (1998)523 U.S. 726, decided May 18, 1998

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 7 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.7.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.10, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.5, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.7.8, pp. 1037, 1038, 1041, 1042, 1043, 1044, 1047.

• interpreted bySuggested
  United States v. Windsor (2013)570 U.S. 744, decided June 26, 2013

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 6 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.5.2, ArtIII.S2.C1.5.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.1, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.9.2, pp. 979, 983, 985, 986, 991, 1032.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Bond v. United States (2014)572 U.S. 844, decided June 2, 2014

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 4 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.10.6, ArtIII.S2.C1.10.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.6, pp. 1077, 1097, 1100, 1101.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Rucho v. Common Cause (2019)588 U.S. 684, decided June 27, 2019

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 2 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.9.10, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.11, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.8, ArtIII.S2.C1.9.9, pp. 1082, 1084.

• interpreted bySuggested
  Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (2020)591 U.S. 197, decided June 29, 2020

  The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 4 pages.

  Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtIII.S2.C1.10.7, ArtIII.S2.C1.5.4, ArtIII.S2.C1.6.1, pp. 984, 986, 988, 1101.

On Article III as a whole

• cited bySuggested
  Massachusetts convention, January 28, 1788, ¶ 1
• cited bySuggested
  New York convention, July 5, 1788, ¶ 5

On Article III, Section 2 as a whole

• cited bySuggested
  House, January 31, 1865, ¶ 24
• cited bySuggested
  Pennsylvania convention, December 1, 1787, ¶ 13
• cited bySuggested
  Virginia convention, June 19, 1788, ¶ 30
• cited bySuggested
  Agrippa 10, ¶ 3
• cited bySuggested
  Sydney 2, ¶ 35