Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Doe · ¶75

To invoke an additional implied cause of action under the ATS, Sosa explained, the plaintiff must identify a norm of international law that has sufficiently “definite content” that has gained “acceptance among civilized nations.” Id., at 732. As part of that inquiry, courts must also make a “judgment about the practical consequences of making that cause available to litigants in the federal courts.” Id., at 732–733. Applying this test, the Court rejected the arbitrary-detention claim that had been raised there. The plaintiff had not alleged a sufficiently definite norm of international law. Recognizing the plaintiff ’s proposed cause of action would also have “breathtaking” consequences by permitting “a cause of action in federal court for any arrest, anywhere in the world,” so long as it is “unauthorized by the law of the jurisdiction in which it took place.” Id., at 736. The Court…

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