By Sabriyya Pate
The Alien Tort Statute (ATS), one of the United States’ oldest laws, provides all federal district courts with general jurisdiction to hear cases brought by non–United States citizens. As written, the ATS empowers non– United States citizens—including victims of torture, kidnapping, forced labor, and child slavery—to sue American individuals and corporations for the customary international law torts committed against them. Over the past two decades, however, the Supreme Court has cabined the ATS such that it is unworkable for the non–United States citizens it was designed to empower. Instead, the Court has contorted the ATS to grant itself greater power over foreign policy and global governance. Meanwhile, amidst our increasingly globalized economy, human rights abuses committed by American multinational corporations (MNCs) against non–United States citizens remain widespread. A revival of a robust interpretation of the ATS would preclude American MNCs from evading the United States judicial system when they commit human rights abuses abroad.
This Comment argues that unraveling the doctrinal fallacies saturating ATS jurisprudence is the first step toward reform. Contextualizing the recent settlement achieved in Doe v. ExxonMobil, this Comment argues that ATS doctrine has become a web of contortions that must be rectified before the Court further usurps foreign policymaking authority. It concludes by outlining a path for legislative action on the issue of human rights abuses committed against non–United States citizens by American corporate actors.