网络空间中的联邦制

D. Burk
{"title":"网络空间中的联邦制","authors":"D. Burk","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.44433","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article addresses federalism issues raised by the interjurisdictional competition that the internet will present. Within the United States, such on-line activity has already become the target of regulation by the states. Analysis of interstate competition in \"law as a product\" is appropriate in determining the proper scope of state regulation of on-line activity. Two lines of constitutional cases define the parameters of proper interstate regulatory competition: those dealing with personal jurisdiction, and those dealing with the dormant commerce clause. Inherent in the Supreme Court's Due Process holdings is the principle that interstate diversity in law products is desireable and central to a federal system. The \"minimum contacts\" test of International Shoe and subsequent cases preserves the individual's right to \"vote with his feet\" in selecting among the law products offered by the several states. Competition for law as a product can only be maintained if states are prevented from externalizing the costs of their local regulations. The Supreme Court holdings regarding the dormant commerce clause indicate that this constitutional doctrine serves to prevent states from exporting their law products to other jurisdictions by attempting to control wholly extraterritorial activity. Although the Internet may in some cases facilitate externalization of state regulatory costs, centralized regulation by the federal government, rather than overreaching by the states, is the proper solution to such externalities","PeriodicalId":80998,"journal":{"name":"Connecticut law review","volume":"28 1","pages":"1095-1136"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.44433","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Federalism in Cyberspace\",\"authors\":\"D. Burk\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.44433\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article addresses federalism issues raised by the interjurisdictional competition that the internet will present. Within the United States, such on-line activity has already become the target of regulation by the states. Analysis of interstate competition in \\\"law as a product\\\" is appropriate in determining the proper scope of state regulation of on-line activity. Two lines of constitutional cases define the parameters of proper interstate regulatory competition: those dealing with personal jurisdiction, and those dealing with the dormant commerce clause. Inherent in the Supreme Court's Due Process holdings is the principle that interstate diversity in law products is desireable and central to a federal system. The \\\"minimum contacts\\\" test of International Shoe and subsequent cases preserves the individual's right to \\\"vote with his feet\\\" in selecting among the law products offered by the several states. Competition for law as a product can only be maintained if states are prevented from externalizing the costs of their local regulations. The Supreme Court holdings regarding the dormant commerce clause indicate that this constitutional doctrine serves to prevent states from exporting their law products to other jurisdictions by attempting to control wholly extraterritorial activity. Although the Internet may in some cases facilitate externalization of state regulatory costs, centralized regulation by the federal government, rather than overreaching by the states, is the proper solution to such externalities\",\"PeriodicalId\":80998,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Connecticut law review\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"1095-1136\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.44433\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Connecticut law review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.44433\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Connecticut law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.44433","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

本文讨论了互联网将呈现的司法管辖区间竞争所引起的联邦制问题。在美国,这种在线活动已经成为各州监管的目标。分析“法律作为一种产品”的州际竞争在确定国家对网络活动监管的适当范围方面是适当的。两类宪法案件定义了适当的州际监管竞争的参数:那些涉及个人管辖权的案件,以及那些涉及休眠商业条款的案件。最高法院的正当程序主张的内在原则是,州际法律产品的多样性是可取的,也是联邦制度的核心。国际制鞋公司和随后的案例的“最小接触”测试,保留了个人在选择几个州提供的法律产品时“用脚投票”的权利。对法律的竞争作为一种产品,只有在阻止各州将其地方法规的成本外部化的情况下才能维持。最高法院关于休眠商业条款的裁决表明,这一宪法原则旨在防止各州通过试图完全控制治外法权活动而将其法律产品出口到其他司法管辖区。虽然互联网在某些情况下可能会促进国家监管成本的外部化,但联邦政府的集中监管,而不是各州的过度监管,才是解决这种外部性的适当办法
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Federalism in Cyberspace
This article addresses federalism issues raised by the interjurisdictional competition that the internet will present. Within the United States, such on-line activity has already become the target of regulation by the states. Analysis of interstate competition in "law as a product" is appropriate in determining the proper scope of state regulation of on-line activity. Two lines of constitutional cases define the parameters of proper interstate regulatory competition: those dealing with personal jurisdiction, and those dealing with the dormant commerce clause. Inherent in the Supreme Court's Due Process holdings is the principle that interstate diversity in law products is desireable and central to a federal system. The "minimum contacts" test of International Shoe and subsequent cases preserves the individual's right to "vote with his feet" in selecting among the law products offered by the several states. Competition for law as a product can only be maintained if states are prevented from externalizing the costs of their local regulations. The Supreme Court holdings regarding the dormant commerce clause indicate that this constitutional doctrine serves to prevent states from exporting their law products to other jurisdictions by attempting to control wholly extraterritorial activity. Although the Internet may in some cases facilitate externalization of state regulatory costs, centralized regulation by the federal government, rather than overreaching by the states, is the proper solution to such externalities
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信