Yesterday, in Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Doe, (Sup. Ct., June 23, 2026), the U.S. Supreme Court rejected claims by practitioners of Falun Gong, that Cisco Systems violated the Alien Tort Statute and the Torture Victim Protection Act by aiding and abetting actions against Falun Gong carried out by the government of China. Cisco created a surveillance technology used by the Chinese Communist Party to identify, track, arrest, subject to forced labor and torture Falun Gong practitioners. At issue is whether the two U.S. statutes permit suits in U.S. courts against Cisco for its role.
The majority opinion written by Justice Barrett and joined by Chief Justice Roberets and Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh Held that "Courts cannot create new rights of action to remedy violations of international law, so there is necessarily no liability for aiding and abetting such violations." They also held that there is no liability under the Torture Victim Protection Act for aiding and abetting.
Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion. Justices Kagan and Jackson joined the dissenting opinion insofar as it disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the Alien Tort Statute. They contended that there is an implied right of action under the Alien Tort Statute for violations of international law. Justice Sotomayor alone went on to argue that the Torture Victim Protection Act allows victims to sue for aiding and abetting torture.
Justice Jackson, joined by Justice Kagen, filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. They agreed with the dissent's views on the Alien Tort Statute. However, they agreed with the majority, though with somewhat different reasoning, that the Torture Victim Protection Act does not create an aiding-and-abetting cause of action.
Reuters reports on the decision. [Thanks to Dusty Hoesly for the lead.]
