ATS abuse

There are some groups who view the ATS as a negative thing. The logic is that the ATS allows aliens to sue other aliens or corporations on grounds that a U.S. citizen could not claim. They further claim that it is a deterrent to multinational corporations from working in the United States if they face liability for something they may have done half-way around the globe. Furthermore, in order for a court to determine what is a tort in the violation of international norms a court must look at sources that are outside the United States and thereby diluting American jurisprudence and independence.

While each of these arguments are somewhat valid they do ignore key facts. In short, U.S. citizens generally have the same if not more rights than an alien suing in federal court; multinationals may face potential liability but given the general protections provided to corporations this argument seems weak; our courts have already been looking at international norms to determine international issues.

Other areas of law

The Alien Tort Statute is unique in American jurisprudence in that it relies heavily on foreign law. The law itself was an effort to conform with international norms, particularly with diplomats, rights to property and piracy. For the majority of the statutes history these three areas were all that were encompassed.

However, with the passage of Filartiga v. Pena-Irala and other ATS suits, both prior and post, have expanded area of laws that can be viewed when determining torts that are in violation of the law of nations. For example, in the United States courts have looked at domestic law, Torture Prevention Act and at international law, Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man or the Convention Against Torture.

Domestic law will be given preference, however, that does not detract from the power of international law. Furthermore, more weight will be given to laws that codify and create an enforceable instrument as opposed to laws or declarations that speak of broad principles (text that is aspirational).

This blog in the future will look at many of these possible sources of international law ranging from the Convention Against Torture to the International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda to the International Criminal Court. The sources of inspiration for expanding the scope of torts in violation of the law of nations is enormous.

Origins of ATS

The origins of the ATS are up to some debate as the historical record is largely silent on what the original legislatures were thinking. Some scholars believe that the ATS was enacted to allow the federal courts of the United States to be able to prosecute violations of international law that posed a threat to international peace and national security. For example the various states were unable or unwilling to prosecute claims by the British and other States for damages stemming from the Wars of Independence. The failure to prosecute posed serious problems for the nation as Britain may have initiated military action to acquire the demanded resources.

The Marbois incident is indicative of the underlying theory behind the ATS. In 1784 the French Consul in Philadelphia was assaulted and it created significant barriers to U.S./French relations. When the Constitutional Convention convened three years later the Marbois incident would have been fresh on everyone's mind.

Other scholars claim the ATS was a "badge of honor" representing a commitment to uphold international norms. Whatever the origins of the ATS may be, the ATS has had a significant impact in recent history on the ability of the United States to impose international norms with domestic courts on aliens. Where the line is drawn has yet to be seen and is open to significant debate.