[AaronInCarolina]

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

So the 1st paragraph of Section 2 is nullified by the 2nd one? Because the 2nd paragraph describes the 1st paragraph cases as appellate jurisdiction. And the 1st paragraph includes cases involving Ambassadors and States as separate cases which are clearly stated as appellate jurisdiction cases. It makes no sense at all to then in the next paragraph declare that any case involving an Ambassador OR any state as having original jurisdiction. It completely nullifies the 1st paragraph of section 2.

[Cboldt]

-- Because the 2nd paragraph describes the 1st paragraph cases as appellate jurisdiction. --

The 1st paragraph is a grant of judicial power, in the aggregate. The 2nd paragraph carves that judicial power into original jurisdiction (which means to try the case), and appellate jurisdiction.