Geometric Federalism
51 Pages Posted: 5 Dec 2023 Last revised: 21 Feb 2024
Date Written: June 28, 2024
Abstract
The geometry of overlapping federal and state sovereigns raises largely unexamined federalism concerns. Because Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(k)(1)(A), for example, restricts federal court personal jurisdiction to the same limits as courts of the state in which they sit, state legislatures can control federal court personal jurisdiction limits more restrictively than what the Due Process Clause demands. So far, the Supreme Court has avoided confronting this issue. The failure to justify federal court deference to state territorial boundaries has always been a problem in need of a solution. But this need grows urgent as polarized state legislatures have grown more active in the culture wars. The Supreme Court's recent resurrection of consent-based jurisdiction, which is effectively immunized from due process challenges, calls for a deep and historical analysis of federal deference to state territorialism. To undertake that analysis, this Article offers a new insight into how overlapping governments approach questions of personal jurisdiction. That fresh analytic perspective is "geometric federalism," the principle that larger superior sovereigns' jurisdiction should not be limited by more restrictive laws adopted by smaller encompassed sovereigns. This principle derives from structural federalism and a normative evaluation of the risks of federal deference. Geometric federalism is a useful tool for justifying a departure from Rule 4(k)(1)(A), as a prism for evaluating other questions of overlapping territorial jurisdiction, and as an eventual guardrail for overeager state legislatures.
Keywords: civil procedure, federalism, personal jurisdiction
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation