Summary
The U.S. Supreme Court held that federal courts may not create new causes of action for violations of international norms under the Alien Tort Statute. The Court also held that the Torture Victim Protection Act does not provide for aiding-and-abetting liability because the statute does not expressly authorize it. The judgment of the Ninth Circuit was reversed and remanded.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether federal courts may create a new cause of action for aiding and abetting violations of international law under the Alien Tort Statute.
- Whether the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 provides a cause of action for aiding and abetting torture.
Holdings
- Federal courts may not create new causes of action for violations of international norms under the ATS. Because courts cannot create an ATS cause of action for the alleged international-law violations, there is no ATS liability for aiding and abetting those violations.
- The TVPA does not provide for aiding-and-abetting liability because it does not mention aiding and abetting, and the term "subjects" does not encompass the broader range of assistance included in aiding-and-abetting liability.
Key quotations
“Today, we close the door that Sosa cracked and hold that courts may not create new causes of action for violations of international norms.” (at 1)
“In truth, this class is a null set.” (at 12)
“Aiding-and-abetting liability sweeps more broadly than the language Congress chose.” (at 14)
Factual background
Respondents, practitioners of Falun Gong or their family members, alleged that the Chinese Government persecuted Falun Gong members through torture, detention, forced labor, and other abuses. They alleged that Cisco Systems and two executives developed and supported surveillance technology used by Chinese authorities to identify and apprehend Falun Gong practitioners. One respondent, a U.S. citizen, asserted a TVPA claim alleging that Cisco executives aided and abetted torture.
Procedural history
The Northern District of California dismissed the complaint. The Ninth Circuit reversed in relevant part, holding that aiding-and-abetting liability was available under both the ATS and the TVPA. The Supreme Court granted certiorari, reversed the Ninth Circuit, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.
Remand instructions
The judgment of the Ninth Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.