{"id":250130,"date":"2021-06-22T14:50:34","date_gmt":"2021-06-22T09:20:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=250130"},"modified":"2021-06-28T17:59:06","modified_gmt":"2021-06-28T12:29:06","slug":"child-slavery-by-nestle","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/22\/child-slavery-by-nestle\/","title":{"rendered":"Whether Nestl\u00e9 and Cargill will be liable for child slavery? SCOTUS decides in 8-1 majority ruling"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS): <\/strong>In 8-1 majority, Thomas, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I and II, in which Roberts, CJ., and Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined, and an opinion with respect to Part III, in which Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Alito, J., joined as to Part I, and in which Kavanaugh, J., joined as to Part II. Sotomayor, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Breyer and Kagan, JJ., joined. Alito \u00a0J. filed a dissenting opinion.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/u><\/p>\n

Respondents alleged that they were trafficked into Ivory Coast as child slaves <\/strong>to produce cocoa.<\/p>\n

It was stated that U. S. based companies Nestl\u00e9 USA, Inc., and Cargill, Inc., do not own or operate cocoa farms in Ivory Coast, but they do buy cocoa from farms located there and provide those farms with technical and financial resources.<\/p>\n

Alien Tort Statute<\/em><\/p>\n

Respondents sued Nestle, Cargill and others under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) which provides the Federal Court’s jurisdiction to hear claims brought by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States contending that the said arrangement aids and abets child slavery.<\/p>\n

District Court had dismissed the suit after this court held that the ATS does not apply extraterritorially.<\/p>\n

Ninth Circuit let this suit proceed as respondents pleaded as a general matter that \u201cevery major operational decision by both companies is made in or approved in the U.S. and allegations of general corporate activity, like decision making cannot alone establish domestic application of the ATS.<\/p>\n

our precedents are clear that creating a cause of action to enforce international law beyond three historical torts invariably gives rise to foreign-policy concerns.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

JUSTICE GORSUCH, with whom JUSTICE ALITO joins as to Part I, and with whom JUSTICE KAVANAUGH joins as to Part II, concurring.<\/strong><\/p>\n