Extraterritoriality

Transnational Litigation Anticipation: Previewing the Court’s Next Term

TLB recently recapped the Supreme Court’s transnational litigation cases from last Term. This post looks ahead to the upcoming Term, for which the Court has already granted certiorari in a personal jurisdiction case that may have implications for transnational litigation. TLB is also tracking several interesting petitions for certiorari in disputes involving the Foreign Sovereign…

Continue Reading

Throwback Thursday: American Banana and the Presumption Against Extraterritoriality

Today, it is “well established” that U.S. antitrust law applies extraterritorially to foreign conduct that causes substantial effects in the United States, but this was not always true. When the Supreme Court first addressed the geographic scope of the Sherman Act in 1909, it held that the act applied only to conduct in the United…

Continue Reading

Section 230 and the Presumption Against Extraterritoriality

The Ninth Circuit opinion in Gonzalez v. Google (2021) raises important questions about how the presumption against extraterritoriality applies to immunity defenses invoked by social media companies under 47 U.S.C. § 230.Section 230 shields internet companies from civil liability for user-generated content hosted on their platforms. Gonzalezholds, effectively, that there is no conceivable application of…

Continue Reading

A Primer on State Law in Transnational Litigation

[Editors: This post is one in a series of Primers on topics in transnational litigation. Primers on each of the topics listed in the Topics menu are planned, and some already appear on the relevant topic pages.] The procedural and substantive rules that U.S. courts apply in transnational litigation come from many sources, including the…

Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Deepens Split over Extraterritoriality of Civil RICO

In a recent decision, Smagin v. Yegiazaryan, the Ninth Circuit weighed in on a circuit split involving the extraterritorial application of RICO’s private right of action. In determining whether there is injury to business or property in the United States, the court rejected the Seventh Circuit’s residency-based test, siding instead with the Second and Third…

Continue Reading

District Court Holds that Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act Does Not Apply Extraterritorially

In a recent decision, Eichhorn-Burkhard v. Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc., a district court in Kansas (Judge Julie Robinson) held that the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (MMWA) does not apply extraterritorially to a U.S. company’s sales of dog food in Europe. The case provides a nice illustration of how U.S. courts apply the presumption against extraterritoriality to…

Continue Reading

Extraterritorial Jurisdiction and Conflict of Laws

In a forthcoming Article, I take the Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudence on the presumption against extraterritoriality and view it through the lens of conflict of laws. In so doing, I attempt to show how the presumption mirrors features of conflicts doctrine and makes some of the same mistakes conflict law already has made. This list…

Continue Reading

The ATS Clarification Act Can Protect Human Rights and Level the Playing Field for U.S. Businesses

As previously reported on TLB, Senators Durbin (D-IL) and Brown (D-OH) recently introduced the Alien Tort Statute Clarification Act (ATSCA), which, if passed, will clarify the extraterritorial reach of the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) and expand the statute’s jurisdiction to cover all defendants “present in” the United States. The ATS is one of our nation’s…

Continue Reading

Doe v. Meta and the Future of the Communications Decency Act

Two law firms recently filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of Rohingya refugees in the United States seeking at least $150 billion in compensatory damages from Meta (formerly Facebook).  The plaintiffs in Doe v. Meta allege that Meta’s algorithms were designed to promote hate speech and misinformation about the Rohingya, a Muslim-minority population in Myanmar…

Continue Reading

Court Holds that ATS Claims for Medical Experimentation Are Not Impermissibly Extraterritorial

In a recent decision, Estate of Alvarez v. The Johns Hopkins University, a federal district court held that claims under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) based on nonconsensual medical experiments in Guatemala were not impermissibly extraterritorial. Although the district court ultimately granted summary judgment for the defendants on other grounds, the decision is significant because…

Continue Reading

Ingrid Brunk Wuerth

Vanderbilt Law School
ingrid.wuerth@vanderbilt.eduEmail

William Dodge

UC Davis School of Law
wsdodge@ucdavis.eduEmail

Maggie Gardner

Cornell Law School
mgardner@cornell.eduEmail

John Coyle

University of North Carolina School of Law
jfcoyle@email.unc.eduEmail

Emma White

Vanderbilt Law School
Bio | Posts

Ellen Nohle

Yale Law School
Bio | Posts

Chris Ewell

EarthRights International
Bio | Posts

Oona A. Hathaway

Yale Law School
Bio | Posts

David L. Sloss

Santa Clara University School of Law
Bio | Posts

Swathi Rajan

Santa Clara University School of Law
Bio | Posts

Yanbai Andrea Wang

University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
Bio | Posts

Pamela K. Bookman

Fordham University School of Law
Bio | Posts

Alyssa S. King

Queen’s University Faculty of Law
Bio | Posts

Katie Burghardt Kramer

DGW Kramer LLP
Bio | Posts