Plaintiff Sidney Blumenthal is a resident of the Washington, D.C. and a high level Assistant to the President of the United States. Defendant Matt Drudge is a resident of Southern California and the creator of a popular electronic political gossip column known as the Drudge Report. This defamation action results from a statement published on the Internet by Drudge which read as follows:

"The DRUDGE REPORT has learned that top GOP operatives who feel there is a double-standard of only reporting republican shame believe they are holding an ace card: New White House recruit Sidney Blumenthal has a spousal abuse past that has been effectively covered up.

The accusations are explosive.

There are court records of Blumenthal's violence against his wife, one influential republican, who demanded  anonymity, tells the DRUDGE REPORT.

If they begin to use [Don] Sipple and his problems against us, against the Republican Party. . . to show hypocrisy, Blumenthal would become fair game. Wasn't it Clinton who signed the Violence Against Women Act?

There goes the budget deal honeymoon.]

One White House source, also requesting anonymity, says the Blumenthal wife-beating allegation is a pure fiction that has been created by Clinton enemies. [The First Lady] would not have brought him in if he had this in his background, assures the well-placed staffer. This story about Blumenthal has been in circulation for years.

Last month President Clinton named Sidney Blumenthal an Assistant to the President as part of the Communications Team. He's brought in to work on communications strategy, special projects themeing -- a newly created position.

Every attempt to reach Blumenthal proved unsuccessful."

    Defendant Drudge moves the court to dismiss or transfer the case for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court described Defendant's Internet presence:
"Access to defendant Drudge's world wide web site is available at no cost to anyone who has access to the Internet at the Internet address of "www.drudgereport.com." The front page of the web site contains the logo "Drudge Report." Defendant Drudge has also placed a hyperlink on his web site that, when activated, causes the most recently published edition of the Drudge Report to be displayed. The web site also contains numerous hyperlinks to other on-line news publications and news articles that may be of interest to readers of the Drudge Report. In addition, during the time period relevant to this case, Drudge had develop a list of regular readers or subscribers to whom he e-mailed each new edition of the Drudge Report.  By March 1995, the Drudge Report had 1,000 e-mail subscribers; and plaintiffs allege that by 1997 Drudge had 85,000 subscribers to his e-mail service." (citations omitted).

    The court laid out the evidence relevant to the question of personal jurisdiction, first explaining Plaintiff's version of the facts:
"Plaintiffs point out that the Drudge Report has been regularly transmitted over the Internet to Drudge's subscribers and repeatedly posted on Drudge's web site, where it has been available 24 hours a day to District residents; that Drudge personally maintains a list of e-mail addresses, which enables him to distribute the Drudge Report to anyone who requests it, including e-mail addresses in the District of Columbia; and that he has solicited contributions and collected money from persons in the District or Columbia who read the Drudge Report. In addition, they state that Drudge has traveled to the District of Columbia twice, including once for a C-SPAN interview that was for the express purpose of promoting the Drudge Report.  Plaintiffs also note, and defendant Drudge admits, that Drudge has been in contact (via e-mail, telephone and the U.S. mail) with District residents who supply him with gossip." (citations omitted).

    Next the court gave Defendant's version of the relevant information:
"Defendant Drudge argues that he has not specifically targeted persons in the District of Columbia for readership, largely because of the non-geographic nature of communicating via the Internet. For example, while it is true that subscribers to the Drudge Report include District residents, generally the only information about those subscribers available to Drudge is all e-mail address -- an address that, unlike a postal address or even a telephone number, typically provides no geographic information. For instance, if Jane Doe from the District of Columbia subscribes to the Drudge Report, it is most likely sent to an e-mail address such as "janedoe@aol.com," and Drudge has no idea where Jane Doe lives or receives the Report. The same is true for on-line browsers who read the Drudge Report, since screen names used to browse the web also are not generally identified by geographic location. Defendant Drudge also claims that he has never advertised the Drudge Report column or web site in physical locations or in local newspapers in the District of Columbia."

    After reviewing the doctrine personal jurisdiction in cases involving the Internet, the court held that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over Drudge was warranted:
"the exercise of personal jurisdiction is contingent upon the web site involving more than just the maintenance of a home page; it must also allow browsers to interact directly with the web site on some level. In addition, there must also be some other non-Internet related contacts between the defendant and the forum state in order for the Court to exercise personal jurisdiction. Because the Court finds that defendant Drudge has an interactive web site that is accessible to and used by District of Columbia residents and, in addition, that he has had sufficient non-Internet related contacts with the District of Columbia, the Court concludes that Drudge has engaged in a persistent course of conduct in the District."

    The court relied on the fact that Defendant's website permitted users, including residents of Washington, D.C., to email Defendant and to request subscriptions by emailing Defendant's host computer. The court also pointed to Defendant's two visits to D.C. and the fact that the subject matter of the Drudge Report focused heavily on "inside the Beltway" gossip, which evidenced solicitation of D.C. residents.