Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:29:14.354Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unshackling Foreign Corporations: Kiobel’s Unexpected Legacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Anupam Chander
Anupam Chander*
Affiliation:
California International Law Center, University of California, Davis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. disfavors American corporations. While largely unshackling foreign corporations from the risk of being haled before an American court to answer for human rights abuses abroad, the decision keeps American corporations constrained by human rights law. This inconsistency exists because application of the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), as announced in Kiobel, turns on whether a corporation’s actions “touch and concern” the United States. American corporations are simply far more likely to satisfy that standard than foreign corporations.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 107 , Issue 4 , October 2013 , pp. 829 - 834
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S.Ct. 1659 (2013).

2 28 U.S.C. §1350.

3 Kiobel, 133 S.Ct. at 1669.

4 John Knox, Death of a Statute: The Kiobel Ruling, CPRBlog (Apr. 19,2013), at http://www.progressivereform.org/CPRBlog.cfm?idBlog=225B214A-B7B5-401A-372F9EE967F2A21C.

5 Kiobel, 133 S.Ct. at 1669.

6 Id.

7 Susan Bisom-Rapp, The Irony of the Supreme Court’s Decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, Work Place Prof Blog (Apr. 18, 2013), at http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/laborprof_blog/2013/04/the-irony-of-the-supreme-courts-decision-in-kiobel-v-royal-dutch-petroleum.html.

8 Oona Hathaway, Kiobel Commentary: The Door Remains Open to “Foreign Squared” Cases, Scotusblog (Apr. 18, 2013), at http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/04/kiobel-commentary-the-door-remains-open-to-foreign-squared-cases.

9 Id.

10 Cases involving U.S. defendants may remain “unresolved” by Kiobel. Marty Lederman, Kiobel Insta-Symposium: What Remains of the ATS?, Opinio Juris(Apr. 18, 2013), at http://opiniojuris.org/2013/04/18/kiobel-insta-symposium-what-remains-of-the-ats/#more-28626.

11 I borrow here from Roger Alford’s excellent list of the array of cases that might satisfy the standard. Roger Alford, Kiobel Insta-Symposium: Degrees of Territoriality, Opinio Juris, (Apr. 22, 2013), at http://opiniojuris.org/2013/04/22/kiobel-insta-symposium-degrees-of-territoriality.

12 Kevin Jon Heller, Is This the Model of a Viable Post- Kiobel ATS Lawsuit?, Opinio Juris (May 10, 2013), at http://opiniojuris.org/2013/05/10/is-this-the-model-of-a-viable-post-kiobel-ats-lawsuit (citing synopsis by Center for Constitutional Rights of Al Shimari v. CACI, at https://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/al-shimari-v-caci-et-al).

13 Justice Stephen Breyer notes that the majority “leaves for another day the determination of just when the presumption against extraterritoriality might be ‘overcome.’” Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S.Ct. 1659, 1673 (2013) (Breyer, J., concurring).

14 For American companies, the stakes continue to be “too high for any corporate manager or director to deny or seek to evade” corporate social responsibility. David Scheffer & Kaeb, Caroline, The Five Levels of CSR Compliance: The Resiliency of Corporate Liability Under the Alien Tort Statute and the Case for a Counterattack Strategy in Compliance Theory, 29 Berkeley J. Int’l L. 334, 334 (2011)Google Scholar.

15 Kiobel, 133 S.Ct. at 1669 (majority opinion).

16 Eric Posner, The United States Can’t Be the World’s Courthouse: Why the Supreme Court Just Killed Off a Whole Category of Human Rights Suits, SLATE (Apr. 24, 2013), at http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2013/04/the_supreme_court_and_the_alien_tort_statute_ending_human_rights_suits.html.

17 Canada objected to an ATS suit brought against a Canadian corporation for conduct that occurred in Sudan. See Presbyterian Church of Sudan v. Talisman Energy, Inc., No. 01 Civ. 9882, 2005 U.S. Dist. Lexis 18399, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 30, 2005). In Kiobel, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom filed amicus briefs objecting to the assertion of jurisdiction in the case. Briefs filed in Kiobel are available online at http://cja.org/section.php?id=509.

18 Breyer quoted the European Commission as stating that it is “‘uncontroversial’ that the United States may... exercise jurisdiction over ATS claims involving conduct committed by its own nationals within the territory of another sovereign, consistent with international law.” Kiobel, 133 S.Ct. at 1676 (Breyer, J., concurring).

19 Id. at 1669 (majority opinion).

20 Bauman v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (Bauman III), 644 F.3d 909 (9th Cir. 2011), cert. granted, 133 S.Ct. 1995, (U.S. Apr. 22, 2013) (No. 11-965).

21 Kiobel, 133 S. Ct. at 1675–76 (Breyer, J., concurring) (“citing inter alia Guererro v. Monterrico Metals PLC [2009] EWHC (QB) 2475 (Eng.) (attacking conduct of U.K. companies in Peru); Lubbe and Others v. Cape PLC, [2000] UKHL 41 (attacking conduct of U.K. companies in South Africa); Rb. Gravenhage [Court of the Hague], 30 December 2009, JOR 2010, 41 m.nt. Mr. RGJ de Haan (Oguro/Royal Dutch Shell PLC) (Neth.) (attacking conduct of Dutch respondent in Nigeria)”). For discussions of human rights litigation in foreign courts, see, in this Agora, Robert McCorquodale, Waving Not Drowning, Kiobel Outside the United States; Caroline Kaeb & David Scheffer, The Paradox of Kiobel in Europe; see also Goldhaber, Michael D., Corporate Human Rights Litigation in Non-U.S. Courts: A Comparative Scorecard, 3 U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 127 (2013)Google Scholar.

22 Stephens, Beth, Translating Filártiga: A Comparative and International Law Analysis of Domestic Remedies for International Human Rights Violations , 27 Yale J. Int’l L. 1, 3 (2002)Google Scholar.

23 Id. at 14–16; cf. Coffee, John C. Jr., Privatization and Corporate Governance: The Lessons from Securities Market Failure, 25 J. Corp. L. 1, 5–8 (1999)Google Scholar (describing plaintiff preference for U.S. litigation in context of investor law suits).

24 Stephens, supra note 22, at 24–27.

25 Whytock, Christopher A., Childress, Donald Earl III & Ramsay, Michael D., Foreword: After Kiobel—International Human Rights Litigation in State Courts and Under State Law , 3 U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 1 (2013)Google Scholar.

26 Peter Spiro, Human Rights Will Survive Kiobel, Opinio Juris (Apr. 17, 2013), at http://opiniojuris.org/2013/04/17/human-rights-will-survive-kiobel.

27 Charles Duhigg & David Barboza, In China, the Human Costs That Are Built into an iPad, N.Y. Times, Jan. 26, 2012, at A 1; Nick Wingfield, Fixing Apple’s Supply Lines, N.Y. Times, Apr. 2, 2012, at B 1.

28 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1997, 15 U.S.C. §78dd-1 [hereinafter FCPA].

29 Cal. Civ. Code §1714.43 (2012).

30 Scheffer & Kaeb, supra note 14, at 335.

31 Laura Sydell, Group Targets Yahoo Inc. over China Cases, National Public Radio, All Things Considered (Apr. 18, 2007), at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9658200; Miguel Helft, Chinese Political Prisoner Sues in U.S. Court, Saying Yahoo Helped Identify Dissidents, N.Y. Times, Apr. 19, 2007, at C 4; Jad Mouawad, Oil Industry Braces for Trial on Rights Abuses, N.Y. Times, May 22, 2009, at B 1; Jad Mouawad, Shell to Pay $15.5 Million to Settle Nigerian Case, N.Y. Times, June 9, 2009, at B 1.

32 Cf. Doe v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 654 F.3d 11 (D.C Cir. 2011).

33 Trachtman, Joel P., International Regulatory Competition, Externalization, and Jurisdiction, 34 Harv. Int’l L.J. 47 (1993)Google Scholar; Morgan, Katherine M., The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act: Toward a Definition of “Foreign Official,“ 38 Brook. J. Int’l L. 415, 422Google Scholar (arguing that one major goal of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions was to level the playing field).

34 Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986, Pub. L.99-440, 100 Stat. 1086 (codified at 22 U.S.C. §§5001– 5116 (1986) (repealed 1993)).

35 Chander, Anupam, Googling Freedom, 99 Calif. L. Rev. 1, 35 (2011)Google Scholar.

36 Congress directed the president to pursue an international anticorruption agreement. Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, 22 U.S.C. §§5301–5306; FCPA, supra note 28.

37 Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act, supra note 34, §403.

38 Congress could not authorize extraterritorial application of the ATS without constraint. Wuerth, Ingrid, The Alien Tort Statute and Federal Common Law: A New Approach, 85 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1931, 1967–71 (2010)Google Scholar (identifying international law limits on prescriptive jurisdiction).

39 Leval, Pierre N., The Long Arm of International Law: Giving Victims of Human Rights Abuses Their Day in Court, 92 Foreign Aff., Mar.–Apr. 2013, at 16, available at http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138810/pierre-n-leval/the-long-arm-of-international-law Google Scholar.