Some Specific Concerns with the New General Jurisdiction

General jurisdiction allows a court to enter a judgment against a defendant regarding a claim that did not arise in the forum. For generations, no one has doubted that such “all-purpose jurisdiction” can be based upon a corporation’s extensive business activities in the forum. Though the verbal formulations have differed, the standard phrase has been that general jurisdiction is permissible when the corporate activities in the forum are continuous and systematic. To be sure, courts have reached irreconcilable conclusions concerning where the line should be drawn, but it has long been unquestioned that at some point a corporation’s level of engagement in the forum justifies subjecting it to general jurisdiction. In Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown and Daimler AG v. Bauman, the Supreme Court restricted activity-based general jurisdiction over corporations. Now, general jurisdiction is proper only where the defendant is “at home.” The Court does not define “at home” but provides paradigms: a