Understandably, courts must have rules about when they will hear a case and when they will not. Parties to a legal action often search for avenues whereby they can acquire access to particular courts. The courts are watchful that jurisdiction has not been “created” by methods that are contrived. In this case, the court had to acknowledge that it did not have the same “citizen of state” definition for a university as for the defendant.
1. What reasoning could lead a court to presume that a university would be a citizen of a state?
2. If the status were changed from a university existing as an “arm” of the state to its being a “citizen” of the state, what effect would the change have on a case such as WVU v. Rodriguez?