Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

University of Michigan Law School

Territoriality

Supreme Court of the United States

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

A Unifying Approach To Nexus Under The Dormant Commerce Clause, Adam B. Thimmesch Mar 2018

A Unifying Approach To Nexus Under The Dormant Commerce Clause, Adam B. Thimmesch

Michigan Law Review Online

The Supreme Court has long debated the existence and scope of its power to restrict state regulation under the so-called negative or dormant Commerce Clause. The Court took a broad view of that power in the late 1800s, but it has refined and restricted its role over time. One area where the Court has continued to wield considerable power, however, has been in the context of state taxes. Specifically, the Court has continued to restrict states' power to compel out-of-state vendors to collect their sales and use taxes based on a physical-presence "nexus" rule. That rule dates back to the …


A Material World: Using Trademark Law To Override Copyright's First Sale Rule For Imported Copies, Mary Lafrance Jan 2014

A Material World: Using Trademark Law To Override Copyright's First Sale Rule For Imported Copies, Mary Lafrance

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

When the Supreme Court held that the first sale rule of copyright law permits the unauthorized importation and domestic sale of lawfully made copies of copyrighted works, regardless of where those copies were made, copyright owners lost much of their ability to engage in territorial price discrimination. Publishers, film and record producers, and software and videogame makers could no longer use copyright law to prevent the importation and domestic resale of gray market copies, and therefore could no longer protect their domestic distributors against competition from cheaper imported copies. However, many of these copyright owners can take advantage of a …


Territorial Restrictions And Per Se Rules--A Re-Evaluation Of The Schwinn And Sealy Doctrines, Michigan Law Review Jan 1972

Territorial Restrictions And Per Se Rules--A Re-Evaluation Of The Schwinn And Sealy Doctrines, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Horizontal territorial restrictions have traditionally been said to be per se illegal. That is, they are illegal no matter what effect they may have on competition. The legality of vertical territorial restrictions, however, is still an unsettled issue. The past decade saw a trend toward considering such restrictions per se violations of section I of the Sherman Act. That trend culminated in United States v. Arnold, Schwinn & Co., a case better known for its speculation than its reasoning. The Supreme Court, which ostensibly announced the per se illegality of these restrictions in Schwinn, will have an opportunity …


International Aspects Of Prohibition Enforcement, Edwin D. Dickinson Jan 1923

International Aspects Of Prohibition Enforcement, Edwin D. Dickinson

Articles

The Eighteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution prohibits "the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes." 40 Stat. io5O, 1941. In the National Prohibition Cases. 253 U. S. 350, 386, the amendment was said to be operative "throughout the entire territorial limits of the United States." As originally enacted, the National Prohibition Act did not in terms define its territorial field, but a supplemental provision afterwards enacted declares that the act "shall apply not only to …


Interstate Commerce And State Control Of Foreign Corporations, Ralph W. Aigler Jan 1910

Interstate Commerce And State Control Of Foreign Corporations, Ralph W. Aigler

Articles

Corporations are the creatures of their parent state and outside the borders of the state creating them they have no existence except such as is granted them by comity. Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 13 Pet. 519; Lafayette Ins. Co. v. French, 18 How. 404; Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wall. 168; Ducat v. Chicago, 10 Wall. 410; Liverpool Ins. Co. v. Massachusetts, 10 Wall, 566; Home Ins. Co. v. Morse, 20 Wall. 445; Horn Silver Mining Co. v. New York, 143 U. S. 305; Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. Texas, 177 U. S. 28; Security Mut. L. I. Co. v. Prewitt, …


The Element Of Locality In The Law Of Criminal Jurisdiction, Henry W. Rogers Jan 1889

The Element Of Locality In The Law Of Criminal Jurisdiction, Henry W. Rogers

Articles

THE Federal Courts have no common law criminal jurisdiction. The question was raised in the United States Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania, in 1798, in United States v. Worrall, 2 Dallas, 384, and the Court was equally divided in opinion. Iii 1818, Mr. Justice STORY, in United States v. Coolidge, 1 Gallison, 488, decided that there were common law offences against the United States. But this, as we shall see, was overruled by the Supreme Court. As early as 1807, Chief Justice MARSHALL, in Ex parte .Bollman, 4 Cranch, 75, had said, "This Court disclaims all jurisdiction not …