Under-PROMESA-Section-306(a)(2)-subject-matter-jurisdiction

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The questions presented are: 1. Under the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (“(PROMESA”) Section 306(a)(2), the Title III Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction includes only matters “arising under” PROMESA’s Title III bankruptcy-like provisions or “arising in” or “related to” cases under Title III. This adversary proceeding (i) did not implicate any substantive right created by Title III, (ii) could exist entirely outside the Title III process, and (ii) had no direct or concrete effect on the Plan of Adjustment or Title III case. Did the First Circuit err in rejecting the “close nexus” test applied by the majority of other Courts of Appeals in determining post-confirmation “related-to” jurisdiction under the Bankruptcy Code to conclude that the Title III Court had post-confirmation subject-matter jurisdiction over this policy dispute between the Oversight Board and the Government? 2. Whenever a new law is enacted in Puerto Rico, PROMESA Section 204(a) requires the Governor to submit to the Board a “formal estimate . . . of the impact, if any, that the law will have on expenditures and revenues,” 48 U.S.C. § 2144(a)(2)(A), and empowers the Board to “seek judicial enforcement of its authority” to “ensure that the enactment or enforcement of the law will not adversely affect the territorial government’s compliance with the Fiscal Plan, including preventing the enforcement or application of the law,” if the Governor fails to submit such an estimate and a certification that the new law is not significantly inconsistent with Puerto Rico’s governing fiscal plan. ii Id. §§ 2124(k); 2144(a)(5). Given Section 204(a)’s requirement that the estimate address only effects the new law “will have” on the Government’s expenditures and revenues, did the First Circuit err in determining that PROMESA Section 204(a)’s “formal estimate” process requires the Government to project the law’s speculative secondary effects in the private labor market?