Supreme Court Reins In Activist Lawsuits, Major Win for U.S. Businesses

She agreed on narrowing the ATS but argued the TVPA’s text could encompass aiding and abetting in some cases.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented more broadly, joined by Kagan and Jackson in key parts, claiming the majority “jettisons two decades of settled precedent” and warning it “forecloses future reliance on Sosa and shuts the courthouse doors to almost any claimed violation of international law under the ATS.”

Sotomayor added on the TVPA: “Because the plain text of this statute includes individuals who aid and abet the victim’s torture, I would affirm the Ninth Circuit’s judgment on this score as well.”

This decision represents a major conservative triumph for textualism, originalism, and restraint.

By ending the era of judicially invented ATS claims and rejecting implied aiding-and-abetting liability under the TVPA, the Court prevents activist plaintiffs and foreign interests from weaponizing U.S. courts against American companies.

Such suits have long imposed massive legal costs, chilled innovation, and entangled businesses in overseas disputes far removed from legitimate U.S. interests.

Companies like Cisco can now focus on lawful commerce without fear of endless “international norm” litigation dreamed up by creative lawyers.