2. In VERLINDEN B.V. v. CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA, 461 U.S. 480, 103 S.Ct. 1962, 76 L.Ed.2d 81 (1983), the Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion written by Chief Justice Burger, observed that Osborn“reflects a broad conception of ‘arising under’ jurisdiction, according to which Congress may confer on the federal courts jurisdiction over any case or controversy that might call for the application of federal law,” but it declined to identify “the precise boundaries” of Article III jurisdiction. Id. at 492 93, 103 S.Ct. at 1971, 76 L.Ed.2d at 91 92. What is the benefit of according so broad a reading to the constitutional grant? Is it significant that the same constitutional language that authorizes Congress to confer jurisdiction on the lower federal courts likewise applies to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States?