Trump v. Barbara · ¶190

American legal authorities described a person as “subject to the jurisdiction” of the government of his domicile. Hood v. Hood, 93 Mass. 196, 199–200 (1865). Then, as now, governments exercised different types of authority over temporary visitors and permanent residents. A government “do[es] not apply the same Laws in all matters to persons who are only temporarily resident, as it applies to persons who are permanently resident within its territory.” 1 Twiss 217. So, while a government applied, among other things, its ordinary criminal laws to temporary visitors, it had a wide range of further powers only with respect to persons domiciled within it. For that reason, when someone was present in a territory but had a domicile elsewhere, although he was still amenable to the laws of the host government, that government would describe him as not “subject to our jurisdiction.” Dorsey v.…

slip opinion, revised 7/01/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.