Corporate Accountability

RELEASE: Supreme Court Leaves Some Corporations Answerable to Alien Tort Statute

WASHINGTON – Following the Supreme Court’s ruling today in Nestlé USA, Inc. v. John Doe I, Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra issued the following reaction:

Today, the Supreme Court held that two American corporations, Nestle USA and Cargill, that allegedly contributed to the perpetration of child slavery in the Ivory Coast could not be sued in U.S. court because most of the challenged conduct occurred abroad. This decision is disappointing, particularly for the respondents, who had been forced as children to work on cocoa plantations.

But the Court refrained from striking an even larger blow: the Court initially agreed to hear these cases to consider whether the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), which allows federal district courts to hear suits for torts “committed in violation of the law of nations,” exempts all corporations from suit.

Rather than decide that question and potentially foreclose future suits like this one, the Court resolved these cases on the ground that a “mere corporate presence” in the United States is insufficient to open the door to federal court.

As Justice Gorsuch pointed out in his concurring opinion, which echoed CAC’s amicus brief in support of the respondents, “That is a good thing: The notion that corporations are immune from suit under the ATS cannot be reconciled with the statutory text and original understanding,” and the Court properly declined to go down that road. Justice Alito also echoed CAC’s amicus brief in his dissenting opinion when he acknowledged that “[c]orporate status does not justify special immunity.”

Although today’s decision is disappointing and will have unfortunate repercussions for the victims in this case and beyond, we remain hopeful that the Court will continue to recognize that the ATS, in accordance with its text and Congress’s plan in passing it, allows federal district courts to hear suits against American corporations for violations of international law.

#

Resources:

CAC case page in Nestlé USA, Inc. v. John Doe I; Cargill, Inc. v. John Doe I: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/nestle-v-doecargill-v-doe/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Corporate Accountability

Corporate Accountability
April 23, 2024

RELEASE: At the Supreme Court, Starbucks’s Arguments Run Headlong into the History of American Labor Law

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Starbucks v....
By: Smita Ghosh
Corporate Accountability
April 22, 2024

TV (Gray TV): CAC’s Ghosh Joins Gray TV to Discuss NLRB Case at Supreme Court

Gray TV Washington News Bureau
Corporate Accountability
April 2, 2024

The Supreme Court May Give Us Another 2008 Financial Crisis

The Lever
A new case could decimate state-level consumer protections against predatory banking practices.
By: Smita Ghosh, Katya Schwenk
Corporate Accountability
U.S. Supreme Court

Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney

In Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, the Supreme Court is considering what standard courts should apply when deciding whether to grant a National Labor Relations Board request for a temporary injunction to halt an alleged unfair...
Corporate Accountability
February 27, 2024

RELEASE: At Oral Argument, Justices Recognize Profound Effect of Banking Case on State Efforts to Protect Consumers

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the U.S. Supreme Court this morning in Cantero...
By: Smita Ghosh
Corporate Accountability
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

National Association of Private Fund Managers v. Securities and Exchange Commission

In National Association of Private Fund Managers v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Fifth Circuit is determining whether Congress granted the SEC the authority to regulate private fund advisers.