Fraudulent schemes increasingly rely on wire transmissions and the internet as the economy and communications digitize. To combat these schemes, prosecutors have applied the wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, to defendants located domestically and abroad. Applying the current standard for extraterritoriality under Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., circuit courts disagree as to whether the wire fraud statute applies extraterritorially. But courts consistently apply an easily met standard when determining if the wire fraud statute should apply domestically under Morrison. This reaches many defendants located abroad. This Comment argues that this broad domestic application of the wire fraud statute shields courts from asking whether the statute applies extraterritorially. Further, this Comment argues that courts’ domestic application of the wire fraud statute is sufficiently broad as to begin to resemble extraterritoriality because courts can almost always find sufficient domestic activity to apply the wire fraud statute. This Comment argues that wire transmissions are sufficiently geographically ambiguous that using a singular statutory focus under Morrison to evaluate whether wire fraud applies domestically is inadequate. In response to that inadequacy, this Comment proposes a new solution that incorporates additional statutory information in evaluating the statute’s domestic application. This solution would better protect defendants from arbitrary domestic application of the wire fraud statute and validate the tenets underlying the doctrine of extraterritoriality.

随着经济和通信数字化，欺诈计划越来越依赖有线传输和互联网。为了打击这些计划，检察官已将电汇欺诈法规（18 USC § 1343）适用于位于国内和国外的被告。根据 Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd. 案中现行的治外法权标准，巡回法院对电汇欺诈法规是否适用于治外法权存在分歧。但法院在确定电汇欺诈法规是否应在莫里森的国内适用时，始终采用易于满足的标准。这涉及到许多位于国外的被告。该评论认为，电汇欺诈法规在国内的广泛适用使法院免于询问该法规是否在域外适用。更远，该评论认为，法院在国内适用电汇欺诈法规的范围足够广泛，以至于开始类似于治外法权，因为法院几乎总能找到足够的国内活动来适用电汇欺诈法规。该评论认为，电汇传输在地理上足够模糊，因此使用莫里森的单一法定焦点来评估电汇欺诈是否适用于国内是不够的。针对这一不足，本意见提出了一种新的解决方案，该解决方案在评估法规的国内适用时纳入了额外的法定信息。该解决方案将更好地保护被告免受国内任意适用电汇欺诈法规的影响，并验证治外法权原则的基本原则。