The U.S. Supreme Court case J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd., v. Robert Nicastro involved a dispute over jurisdictional authority in product liability cases involving foreign manufacturers selling products within the United States through independent distributors. The petitioner, British manufacturer J. McIntyre Machinery, argued that it was not subject to personal jurisdiction in New Jersey courts because it did not have sufficient contacts with the state of New Jersey despite one of its machines causing an injury there to respondent Robert Nicastro. In 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of J.McIntyre Machinery by a vote of six justices to three and held that a foreign manufacturer could not be sued for damages under state law unless they had targeted their activities towards that particular state rather than just generally marketing their products throughout America.

In the dissenting opinion for J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd., v. Robert Nicastro, Justice Ginsburg disagreed with the majority's ruling that New Jersey courts lacked jurisdiction over a British manufacturer whose product caused injury in New Jersey. She argued that globalization and advancements in technology have made it easier for companies to market their products worldwide and should therefore be held accountable wherever their products cause harm. She contended that J. McIntyre Machinery had targeted a nationwide market through an independent distributor and thus could reasonably anticipate being hauled into court in any U.S state where its machines were sold or caused injury, including New Jersey.