The Constitution established the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction to provide a tribunal of the highest stature for disputes to which a state was a party and for cases involving the representatives of foreign nations. In practice, the Supreme Court has only rarely exercised its jurisdiction over foreign officials. Instead, the Supreme Court's original docket has been dedicated largely to resolving disputes between state governments.
Article III, section 2, of the Constitution distributes the federal judicial power between the Supreme Court's appellate and original jurisdiction, providing that the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction in "all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls," and in cases to which a state is a party. In the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress made the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction exclusive in suits between two or more states, between a state and a foreign government, and in suits against ambassadors and other public ministers. The Supreme Court's jurisdiction over the remainder of suits to which a state was a party was to be concurrent, presumably with state courts since the statute did not expressly confer these cases upon the inferior federal courts.
https://www.fjc.gov/history/courts/jurisdiction-original-supreme-court
So, yes, disputes between two or more states, as I said earlier, Redward.
Nice try.
But Article III Clause 2 is the law of the land.
The Judiciary Act of 1789 may have added power to the Court, it did not diminish it.
The facts that are indisputable and pertain to a small number of lawsuits— those involving ambassadors, public ministers and consuls, or where
a state is a party the Supreme Court is the first court to hear the case.
Why this is an issue for you is puzzling, since it has nothing to do with your original question.
Poll
5 (45.5%)