Mullin v. Al Otro Lado · ¶54

We have sometimes used the presumption against extraterritoriality to determine whether statutes with more-orless settled meanings applied outside the United States. See, e.g., RJR Nabisco, 579 U. S., at 329, 338. Here, the presumption serves a somewhat different purpose: to determine whether either of two interpretations of the phrase “arrives in the United States” gives extraterritorial reach to the provisions in which that phrase appears. See Small v. United States, 544 U. S. 385, 388 (2005) (“In determining the scope of [a] statutory phrase we find help in the ‘commonsense notion that Congress generally legislates with domestic concerns in mind’”).

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