This Note argues that courts should not apply the Daimler general jurisdiction standard to defendants in ATA civil proceedings, because (1) it was not intended to insulate certain foreign terrorist sponsors from these actions and (2) applying Daimler would seriously undermine the purpose of the ATA’s civil provision. Part I surveys the jurisdictional requirements that must be satisfied to bring foreign defendants into federal court. Part II discusses the position of various courts on the issue of whether foreign defendants in ATA civil actions can be subject to the federal jurisdiction on the basis of Daimler’s standards. Part III urges the Supreme Court to exempt ATA civil actions from Daimler’s standard to ensure that Americans can continue bringing such suits against sponsors of terrorism. Finally, Part IV explains why Daimler cannot apply to foreign defendants in ATA civil actions without creating virtual immunity for certain classes of terrorist sponsors and undermining the purposes of the ATA.