Copan Travel on More and more the state is compelled to negotiate its power with local, transnational, international, and global agents of power as well as with sources of law (on the distinctions between these dimensions, see Ferrarese 2006). This leads to a situation in which, Sassen writes, It is becoming evident that state sov- ereignty articulates both its own and external conditions and norms. Sovereignty remains a systemic property but its institutional insertion and its capacity to legitimate and absorb all legitimating power, to be the source of the law, have become unstable. The politics of contemporary sovereignties are far more complex than notions of mutually exclusive territorialities can capture (Sassen 2006,415)- It is particularly important for our present analysis that Sassen exemplifies this point by discussing a wide set of transformations in border regimes worldwide. She points to the detachment of bordering capabilities from geographic territory and to the existence of multiple locations for the border, whether inside firms or in long transnational chains of locations that can move deep inside national territorial and institutional domains (Sassen 2006, 416). These nongeographic bordering capabilities and multiple locations for the border represent crucial sites for the working of contemporary sovereignty. They also register the instability of its institutional locations, which no longer assume a territorial correlate (416). Copan Travel 2016.