Document Type


Publication Date



In the Supreme Court’s recent general jurisdiction cases, it narrowed general jurisdiction in accord with a “reasonableness” approach to jurisdiction that is consistent with International Shoe’s so-called “forward-looking” face. In the Court’s most recent specific jurisdiction case, Walden v. Fiore, the Court took steps toward assessing specific jurisdiction under a reasonableness analysis, but it ultimately reunited the antagonistic “reasonableness” and territorial power theories to impose artificial limits on specific jurisdiction. The newly narrowed general jurisdiction will not often be available as a “safety valve” to provide jurisdiction in some cases in which jurisdiction would be reasonable under the circumstances. This Article, thus, explores the Court’s recent personal jurisdiction cases and advocates that the Court adopt a more expansive, “interest” analysis for specific jurisdiction that accords both with some prior Supreme Court cases and with suggestions in Justice Ginsburg’s recent personal jurisdiction opinions.

Publication Title

SMU L. Rev.