Should congress ever limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts for political reasons?

Answer 1

No. The limits are set where they are intended to be; once you let politicians meddle with the lines, you allow a precedent that effectively means Congress controls the courts, an imbalance of power that contradicts the very idea of the system.

Clarifying information:

Putting aside the issue of tinkering with jurisdiction for "political purposes", it is incorrect to say that limits have been set and that Congress should not control the courts.

Congress to a great degree DOES control the jurisdiction of the courts and this is not inconsistent with our Constitution. Article III of the US Constitution states:

"The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme (sic) Court and such other inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish."

In addition, Article I states that Congress shall have the power to create tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court. Article I does not state that Congress SHALL do so.

Thus, the United States Constitution did not create a federal court system nor even mandate that one be created. Congress has complete constitutional discretion to create, not create or remove a court that had already been created by it.

As to jurisdiction specifically, Article III states as to the Supreme Court:

"In all other cases before mentioned, the supreme (sic) Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make."

From this it is clear that Congress has the power to alter the jurisdiction of the federal courts. There have been many Congressional attempts to restrict the jurisdiction of the federal courts. The Supreme Court has ruled that some have been constitutional and others unconstitutional.