Replies

You missed a comma. Boolean construction doesn’t apply

If a boolean AND does not apply, then that would nullify the previous paragraph, where numerous cases involving a state (and separately some involving just ambassadors) were stated to be appellate jurisdiction:

Section 2. 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;--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 under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

These are the aforementioned "other Cases" in the subsequent paragraph:

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

It doesn't make sense to declare numerous scenarios which involve a State to be appellate jurisdiction, and then follow that with a paragraph where one clause is interpreted as meaning all cases involving a state are SC original jurisdiction.

"In cases affecting Ambassadors," one idea separated from another idea by a comma then "other public Ministers and Consuls", yet another idea separated by a comma, then "and those in which a State shall be a Party", yet another separate idea with a comma separating it from the previous ideas.

If the Founders meant what you say why didn't they simply write "If a case has Ambassadors, public Ministers and Consuls and a State the Supreme Court has jurisdiction"?

No, those are all separate ideas and only a Lawyer could read it otherwise.