LogFAQs > #955170354

xp1337 posted...

The court is saying that the ATS only applies when the crime in question occurs in US territory (i.e. the violation of international law was committed in the US) because unless a law is explicit otherwise, all US laws are assumed to only apply within the US and can not be enforced abroad - and failing that explicit mention in the law (as they have ruled the ATS does not have such), it must be proven that the relevant conduct in the claim occurred in the US. The Court notes that while both sides disagree as to what occurred - even if they accepted the side of the former child slaves argument over what the crux of the issue was - the slavery and financial assistance all occurred on the Ivory Coast, not in the US and therefore was outside the US so the ATS does not apply.

The Court goes on to state that "decision making" such as operational decisions is a "general corporate activity" and therefore alone is not enough to establish a strong enough link to say the primary harm was committed domestically. I agree that's pretty fucked up.

So am I correct in assuming that the SC is essentially officially saying US companies are free to violate laws oversees with no legal repercussions in the US (at least with regards to this statute) or is that a leap in logic? Because that's where it's interesting, the 9th Circuit ruled that corporate decision making and financing was enough to consider it a domestic crime, which the SC has decided to overturn.

---

I definitely did not forget to put the 2020 GOTD Guru winner, azuarc in my sig!