Unpacking the Originalist Argument for Maximalist Personal Jurisdiction, Part III: Admiralty Jurisdiction
This is the third in a series of posts questioning the originalist argument for maximalist personal jurisdiction. The crux of the originalist argument is that early federal decisions discussed limits on personal jurisdiction in terms of international law (not constitutional constraints) and that Congress could override international law. Thus, the theory goes, Congress as an…
Continue ReadingCourt Allows Claims of Forced Labor to Build World Cup Stadiums
On June 26, 2025, in F.C. v. Jacobs Solutions Inc., Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung (District of Colorado) partly granted and partly denied a motion to dismiss claims against U.S. companies under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) alleging their participation in a venture that used forced labor to build stadiums in Qatar for…
Continue ReadingEnforcement Deadlines for Foreign Arbitral Awards and Judgments
In a recent decision, Amaplat Mauritius Ltd. v. Zimbabwe Mining Development Corp. (2025), the D.C. Circuit held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s exceptions for implied waivers and arbitral award enforcement do not apply to proceedings to enforce foreign judgments, even when the judgment is based on an underlying arbitral award. The decision creates a…
Continue ReadingUnpacking the Originalist Argument for Maximalist Personal Jurisdiction, Part II: The Logic of Syllogisms
This is the second post in a series questioning the originalist argument for maximalist personal jurisdiction, as embraced by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch in their Fuld v. PLO concurrence. Pivotal to the originalist theory of maximalist personal jurisdiction is the argument that limits on adjudicative power were initially understood not as due process limits (or…
Continue ReadingPotential Impact of Recent Cartel Designations
On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order (E.O.) 14157, directing the Secretary of State to designate international criminal organizations, including drug cartels, as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs) under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). On February 20, 2025,…
Continue ReadingMini-SPEECH Acts
In the United States, it is common for states to enact statutes that mirror those already in operation at the federal level. These state statutes are sometimes described as “mini” versions of a particular federal enactment. A quick internet search turned up references to mini-FTC Acts, mini-WARN Acts, mini-Brooks Acts, and mini-Randolph-Sheppard Acts, among others….
Continue ReadingUnpacking the Originalist Argument for Maximalist Personal Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Fuld v. PLO declined to address what it called the “maximalist” theory of personal jurisdiction put forward by the petitioners, several amici (including the House of Representatives), and some vocal lower court judges: That as a matter of original understanding, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment places…
Continue ReadingNigerian Judgment Satisfies Arizona’s Reciprocity Requirement
On July 10, 2025, in Ejeh v. Ali, the Arizona Court of Appeals recognized a Nigerian judgment, finding that Nigeria’s foreign judgments law satisfied Arizona’s reciprocity requirement. Reciprocity requirements are rare in state laws governing foreign judgments—Arizona is one of just five states to have such a requirement. The decision thus affords an opportunity to…
Continue ReadingUtah: A Virtual Gretna Green?
In Jane Austen’s novel, Pride and Prejudice, Lydia Bennet plans to elope to the village of Gretna Green, Scotland with Mr. Wickham. As she explains in a letter: You will laugh when you know where I am gone, and I cannot help laughing myself at your surprise tomorrow morning, as soon as I am missed….
Continue ReadingFuld’s Implications for the FSIA (and Other Federal Statutes)
In Fuld v. PLO, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “the Fifth Amendment does not impose the same jurisdictional limitations as the Fourteenth.” This means that Congress may authorize federal courts to exercise personal jurisdiction over defendants that state courts may not constitutionally reach. In Fuld, the Court upheld the constitutionality of the Promoting Security…
Continue Reading