1. Do you think that the "home court advantage" that justifies diversity jurisdiction still exists? Why or why not?

2. Should states retain the ability to grant more civil rights than the federal Constitution? Can you think of historical examples of this happening? What implications does this have for the future?

3. Stare decisis requires courts to respect and follow established precedent. Why do you think stare decisis is important in our common-law system? What do you think would happen if courts were not bound to stare decisis?

4. Under what circumstances do you think the Supreme Court should feel comfortable abandoning a prior precedent? Do you think the answer differs depending on whether you believe in judicial originalism or activism?