THE ABOLITION OF FEDERAL DIVERSITY JURISDICTION, DEFINED AS FEDERAL PRECEDENCE IN CASES INVOLVING PURELY STATE LAW QUESTIONS WHEN THE PARTIES ARE RESIDENTS OF DIFFERENT STATES, IS DIVIDED INTO EIGHT MAJOR LEGISLATIVE ISSUES. THESE ISSUES ARE FURTHER CLASSIFIED INTO TWO SUBSETS WHICH ARE LABELED 'HARD VARIABLES' AND 'SOFT VARIABLES.' THE FORMER IS DIFFERENTIATED FROM THE LATTER ON THE BASIS OF THEIR GREATER AMENABILITY TO QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS. HARD VARIABLES ARE CASE FILING RATES AND CASE BACKLOGS IN THE FEDERAL COURTS; COST PER CASE, AS MEASURED BY THE PROPENSITY OF CASES TO GO ALL THE WAY TO TRIAL; AMOUNT OF JUDGE TIME AVAILABLE TO A POTENTIAL LITIGANT; AND TIME REQUIRED FOR CASE RESOLUTION. SOFT VARIABLES ARE FEDERALISM, OR FEDERAL DEFERENCE OWED TO THE STATES TO HANDLE STATE MATTERS; COMPETENCY OF STATE JUDGES; CHOICE OF STATE OR FEDERAL COURT OFFERED THE LITIGANT AND COUNSEL; AND ADVANTAGES DERIVABLE FROM INTERMINGLING STATE AND FEDERAL ISSUES. NEXT, A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS WAS CONDUCTED ON WHETHER ANY OF THE VARIABLES WOULD BE REFLECTED IN FUTURE LAWS AND WHAT THE ESTIMATED IMPACT MIGHT BE ON THE RESOURCES OF THE FEDERAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. ADDITIONAL AND MORE DETAILED INFORMATION ALSO WAS OBTAINED FROM SIMULATION AND FEEDBACK ROUNDS. AMONG THE RESULTS ACHIEVED FROM THE CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS AND SIMULATION EXERCISES WERE A 22 PERCENT REDUCTION IN FEDERAL COURT CASELOADS, A TREND TOWARD A DECREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT CASES SPENT IN THE SYSTEM, AND A TENDENCY FOR JUDGES TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS OF DIVERSITY JURISDICTION CASES BY CREATING MORE WORK FOR THEMSELVES. ALSO, THE CASELOADS IN STATE COURTS INCREASED. TABLES AND FIGURES ARE PROVIDED.