The End of Another Era: Reflections on Daimler and Its Implications for Judicial Jurisdiction in the United States

The Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman confirmed what the Court hinted at in its earlier decision in Goodyear Dunlop Tires v. Brown—that a corporation must be sued “at home” unless the claims being asserted relate to the corporation’s activity in the forum state. Together, the decisions put an end to an era of general jurisdiction jurisprudence in the United States. This Article highlights the impact of these decisions in both interstate and international cases. It examines related areas of jurisdictional doctrine that are likely to be affected, including new ways of defining and interpreting specific jurisdiction. It notes the developing case law raising constitutional challenges to corporate registration statutes that purport to confer general jurisdiction on the basis of the corporation’s consent. It also identifies problems created for recognition and enforcement of foreign country judgments and awards if the Daimler standard is applied in that context. This Article concludes with the observation that a more comprehensive approach to jurisdiction may be called for, including possible legislative solutions.