Media Roundup: Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization

Photo by Ian Hutchinson on Unsplash

On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court decided Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization, a case on review from the Second Circuit dealing with the limits of personal jurisdiction under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The Court reversed the Second Circuit unanimously, holding that the personal jurisdiction provisions of the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (PSJVTA) were within the bounds of Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. In doing so, the Court held that the personal jurisdiction analysis under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause differs from that under the Fourteenth Amendment–but declined to articulate a Fifth Amendment test for personal jurisdiction. This media roundup identifies some of the things being said about the decision so far.

• For TLB: Professor Maggie Gardner described the Court’s opinion, on initial assessment, as “arguably the least disruptive way of salvaging the PSJVTA.” She explained that although the Court does not provide a test, it appears to use an International Shoe-esque framework when highlighting the nexus between the defendant’s conduct and the interests of the United States.

• For Bloomberg Law: Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson had previously noted the “potential landmine[]” the Court faced regarding the relative power of different branches of government to decide if foreign sovereigns can be sued. On release of the opinion, Robinson and Alexia Massoud emphasized that the Court’s opinion acknowledged the “considered judgment” of Congress and the President.

• For SCOTUSBlog: Amy Howe also noted the Court’s focus on the power of the other branches. She pointed out how the Court referenced the federal government’s “both nationwide and extraterritorial authority” in reversing the Second Circuit and differentiating the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment jurisdictional analyses.

• For the Wall Street Journal: The Editorial Board penned an article criticizing the Second Circuit’s decision more than exploring the legal implications of the Supreme Court’s opinion. The Board called the “obstinate” Second Circuit’s finding that there was no personal jurisdiction “bizarre[]” and deems their reasoning “constitutionally errant.”

Fuld may fly under the radar a bit in the midst of other opinions released this Term. However, the Court’s decision to make Fifth Amendment personal jurisdiction analysis a kind of “green glass door” will likely result in Fuld making a number of future appearances in petitions for certiorari.