Alien Tort Litigation: The Road Not Taken

William S. Dodge

University of California, Davis - School of Law


89 Notre Dame Law Review 1577
UC Hastings Research Paper No. 80

When the Second Circuit decided in Filartiga v. Pena-Irala that the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) provided a federal forum for international human rights claims, no one would have predicted that thirty-three years later in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. the Supreme Court would use the presumption against extraterritoriality to limit those claims. This essay recounts some of the doctrinal developments in alien tort litigation during the intervening thirty-three years.

After Filartiga, courts faced a choice whether to apply international law as the rule of decision, or the law of the place where the tort occurred. Courts chose the international law road, with U.S. law providing the cause of action and the rules for damages. The Supreme Court ratified this choice in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, clarifying that the cause of action came not from the ATS itself but from federal common law. In the battles over aiding and abetting liability that followed, plaintiffs argued that federal common law should govern just about every issue of ATS litigation except the initial violation of international law, while defendants and the Bush Administration argued that the presumption against extraterritoriality should apply to the federal common law cause of action, the position the Supreme Court accepted in Kiobel. This essay argues that the early decisions to apply international law rather than the lex locus delicti as the rule of decision in alien tort litigation ultimately provided the doctrinal hook for the Supreme Court to restrict alien tort suits with the presumption against extraterritoriality. It also glances briefly down the road not taken.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 32

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: January 10, 2014 ; Last revised: May 15, 2014

Suggested Citation

Dodge, William S., Alien Tort Litigation: The Road Not Taken (2014). 89 Notre Dame Law Review 1577; UC Hastings Research Paper No. 80. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2377053

Contact Information

William S. Dodge (Contact Author)
University of California, Davis - School of Law ( email )
Martin Luther King, Jr. Hall
Davis, CA CA 95616-5201
United States

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,482
Downloads: 129
Download Rank: 175,334