Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-416_i4dj.pdf
Page Number: 21

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

1 

SOTOMAYOR, J., concurring
Opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

Nos. 19–416 and 19–453 
_________________ 

19–416 

NESTLE USA, INC., PETITIONER 
v. 
JOHN DOE I, ET AL. 

19–453 

CARGILL, INC., PETITIONER 
v. 
JOHN DOE I, ET AL. 

ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

[June 17, 2021] 

JUSTICE  SOTOMAYOR,  with  whom  JUSTICE  BREYER  and 
JUSTICE KAGAN  join, concurring in part and concurring in 
the judgment. 

I join Parts I and II of the Court’s opinion.  Because re-
spondents have failed to allege a domestic application of the 
Alien  Tort  Statute  (ATS),  their  complaint  must  be  dis-
missed.  I do not, however, join JUSTICE THOMAS’ alterna-
tive path to that disposition, which would overrule Sosa v. 
Alvarez-Machain,  542  U. S.  692  (2004),  in  all  but  name. 
The First Congress enacted the ATS to ensure that federal 
courts are available to foreign citizens who suffer interna-
tional law violations for which other nations may expect the 
United  States  to  provide  a  forum  for  redress.  JUSTICE 
THOMAS would limit the ATS’ reach to only the three inter-
national law torts that were recognized in 1789.  That read-
ing  contravenes both this  Court’s express  holding  in Sosa 
and the text and history of the ATS.