Extraterritorial Jurisdiction

Image via Wikipedia

Under the “The State/this state” hypothesis, the term “The State” is intended to signify any one of the 50 States of the Union (such as “The State of Texas” or “The State of Florida”).  The term “this state,” on the other hand, is intended to signify administrative districts (like “TX” or “FL”) of a singular territory that spans the entire U.S..   (For more insight into this hypothesis, see, “The States of the Union vs. The Territory” at http://adask.wordpress.com/2011/06/14/the-states-of-the-union-vs-the-territory/#more-7133).

According to the “The State/this state” hypothesis, the federal gov-co has supplanted “The States” of the Union with the administrative districts of a singular national territory.  It is believed that the feds caused this change because, under Article 1 of the federal Constitution, Congress has limited and enumerated powers with regard to “The States” of the Union, but under Article 4.3.2 of the Constitution, Congress has virtually unlimited powers over the territories.

 

Washington DC Boundary Stones

Image via Wikipedia

Here’s a curious little article concerning the actual boundaries of Washington DC.  The article is interesting in the context of theories that the Zip Code and/or the “territories” have been expanded to essentially allow the federal government confined to Washington DC to exert an extra-territorial jurisdiction over the whole country.  I.e., what would happen if you established that your venue was both physical and absolutely external to the physical boundaries of Washington DC?  Could an express declaration of the physical boundaries of Washington DC enhance the strength of any lawsuits intended to keep the federal gov-co at bay?  Once those boundaries are established, what is the gov-co’s authority to exercise “extra-territorial jurisdiction” beyond those boundaries?

http://www.boundarystones.org/