In an interesting opinion dismissing a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Judge Easterbrook wrote: “plaintiffs lack a serious claim under the Constitution whether or not the schedule for step increases creates a ‘property right.’ Normally failure on the merits leads to judgment in defendants’ favor rather than to dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. See Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678 (1946). But some theories are such piffle that they fail even to make out claims arising under federal law, and these must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.” Goros v. County of Cook, No. 06-3880 (7th Cir. June 11, 2007) (citations omitted) [again, it is a published opinion but I do not have the F.3d citation].

Piffle is nonsense or a trivial or insignificant idea. Constitutional piffle is insufficient to create a federal question. A great principle and a fun word, especially for any district court law clerks lurking out there.