What is the principle established in International Shoe regarding personal jurisdiction?

The principle established in International Shoe Co. v. Washington is centered on the concept of "sufficient minimum contacts." This landmark case set the standard for personal jurisdiction by asserting that a court can exercise jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant if that defendant has established significant connections with the forum state, such that maintaining a lawsuit in that state does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

The idea of minimum contacts ensures that a defendant cannot be brought into a forum simply based on the presence of the plaintiff or the location of the injury incurred. Instead, it requires a connection between the defendant's activities and the state where the lawsuit is filed. This connection can arise from various interactions, such as conducting business, selling products, or engaging in other activities that would reasonably foresee the possibility of being sued in that forum.

In contrast, being physically present in the forum state or the plaintiff's residence does not suffice for establishing jurisdiction without the existence of these minimum contacts. Similarly, the notion that litigation can proceed in any state regardless of the defendant's connections disregards the fundamental principles established in International Shoe concerning fairness and justice in legal proceedings.