Some courts have allowed “general jurisdiction by consent” as a way to dodge Daimler AG. V. Baumann, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014), on the basis of an ancient Supreme Court decision from 1917 – Pennsylvania Fire Insurance Co. v. Gold Issue Mining & Milling Co., 243 U.S. 93, 95 (1917). This blog post points out that this argument can be countered successfully with Supreme Court decisions (almost as old) involving the Dormant Commerce Clause. It’s a nice counter, and it has worked. Read the blog post here.