Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Doe · ¶26

Six judges dissented from the denial of rehearing en banc. They reasoned that ATS liability should be restricted “to causes of action comparable to historically recognized torts.” 113 F. 4th 1230, 1237 (CA9 2024) (opinion of Bumatay, J.). That is so because creating any additional liability under the ATS violates the separation of powers. Id., at 1245–1247. And the dissenting judges would exercise greater caution before “intrud[ing] in the delicate relations with another world superpower.” Id., at 1237, 1247–1248.

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.