The future of transnational litigation in U.S. courts: distinct field or footnote?

In the world of law practice, firms and clients increasingly regard transnational dispute resolution as a separate specialty, practiced and marketed as such. One way of categorizing civil litigation in the US is to divide disputes into three categories: 1. strictly local disputes; 2. interstate disputes; and 3. transnational disputes. In the two decades since 1987, the signals from state and federal courts have been mixed. One can point to prominent instances in which courts have found interstate precedents inapplicable to cases involving foreign plaintiffs or defendants. The law relating to personal jurisdiction presents a strong case for separation. The practical consequences of dismissing a case for lack of personal jurisdiction are dramatically different depending on whether the defendant is foreign or domestic. The author's argument is not that developments are artificial or lacking in substance. The point is that it is too early for transnationalists to break out the champagne.