What does the "effects test" allow courts to do regarding personal jurisdiction?

The "effects test" is a principle used to determine personal jurisdiction based on the actions of a defendant that are aimed at or foreseeably affect the forum state. By asserting jurisdiction based on this test, courts focus on whether the defendant's conduct was specifically intended to cause effects within that state. This is particularly relevant in cases involving tortious acts or other conduct where the defendant may not have physically entered the forum state but has nonetheless engaged in actions that have substantial repercussions there.

For example, if a defendant engages in conduct with the knowledge that it will likely harm a person or entity in the forum state, the court may find that it has personal jurisdiction due to those directed actions. This approach aligns with the due process requirements set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court, ensuring that a defendant is subject to the jurisdiction of a state only if they have engaged in meaningful contacts with that state.

The other options do not accurately reflect the principles of personal jurisdiction established under the "effects test." Residence is not a sole determinant, and physical presence in the state or limitations to criminal cases do not capture the broader implications of intentional actions affecting a forum state. Therefore, the correct answer highlights the importance of jurisdiction arising from a defendant's deliberate actions that create effects in the