The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that foreign plaintiffs cannot sue American companies under the Alien Tort Statute for human rights abuses abroad.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Tuesday that foreign plaintiffs cannot use the Alien Tort Statute or the Torture Victim Protection Act to sue American companies for allegedly aiding and abetting human rights abuses abroad. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the conservative majority in Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Doe, held that federal judges lack the constitutional authority to create private causes of action under the 1789 statute. The landmark decision effectively closes the door on extraterritorial litigation targeting U.S. corporations over their international commercial ties and technology sales.
The litigation originated from a lawsuit brought by unnamed practitioners of Falun Gong, a religious movement banned by China. The plaintiffs accused Cisco Systems and its executives of providing surveillance and networking infrastructure, specifically the Golden Shield project, which they claimed facilitated their surveillance, detention, and torture by the Chinese government. While lower courts had previously revived the claims, the Supreme Court’s definitive reversal completely ends that legal theory.
Emphasizing the constitutional separation of powers, the majority reasoned that establishing private rights of action remains an extraordinary legislative prerogative reserved exclusively for Congress. Allowing unelected federal judges to recognize new tort claims based on evolving international norms risks severe judicial encroachment on foreign policy. Because the Alien Tort Statute serves strictly as a jurisdictional statute and the Torture Victim Protection Act lacks text mentioning secondary liability, the court concluded Cisco could not face liability.
The ruling closely aligns with arguments presented by the federal government and the Solicitor General’s office, which warned that unchecked extraterritorial litigation could disrupt foreign diplomacy and chill American technological innovation abroad. Business groups and defense counsel celebrated the decision for removing a cloud of perpetual legal exposure for tech firms and global manufacturers operating in complex international markets, ending decades of expansive class actions under the historic statute.
