Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Doe · ¶76
“In the years since, this Court has read Sosa to announce a two-step test for recognizing the availability of a cause of action under the ATS.” Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Doe, 593 U. S. 628, 648 (2021) (SOTOMAYOR, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment). At step one, courts ask “‘whether a plaintiff can demonstrate that the alleged violation is “of a norm that is specific, universal, and obligatory.”’” Ibid. If the plaintiff makes that required showing, then the court must determine “‘whether allowing [a] case to proceed under the ATS is a proper exercise of judicial discretion.’” Ibid. That discretionary inquiry must account for “the potential implications for the foreign relations of the United States of recognizing such causes [of action],” as courts must be “particularly wary of impinging on the discretion of the Legislative and Executive Branches in managing foreign affairs.”…Read in context ›
slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.