Editing Openai/695c860c-fb24-8010-a014-a687d2d61cb3 (section)

==== Your linguistic point is correct. ====

“Under” in 18th-century legal usage means:
* subject to
* governed by
* within the authority of
* subordinate to

It does not mean:
* “caused by”
* “created by”
* “textually specified in”

All states operate under the Constitution in exactly this sense:
* by ratification
* by compact
* by submission to supremacy
* by acceptance of judicial review

Therefore, a controversy can “arise under” the Constitution whenever:
* a party acts subject to constitutional authority, and
* the legitimacy of that action or injury is contested.

A state official violating human rights while exercising state authority is acting under the Constitution — even if no clause enumerates the specific right violated.