Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-416_i4dj.pdf
Page Number: 33

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

1 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

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 ALITO, dissenting. 
The primary question presented in the two certiorari pe-
titions filed in these cases is whether domestic corporations 
are  immune  from  liability  under  the  Alien  Tort  Statute 
(ATS), 28 U. S. C. §1350.  I would decide that question, and 
for the reasons explained in  Part I of JUSTICE GORSUCH’s 
opinion, which I join, I would hold that if a particular claim 
may  be  brought  under  the  ATS  against  a  natural  person 
who  is  a  United  States  citizen,  a  similar  claim  may  be 
brought against a domestic corporation.  See also ante, at 8, 
n.  4  (SOTOMAYOR,  J.,  joined  by  BREYER  and  KAGAN,  JJ., 
concurring in part and concurring in judgment).  Corporate 
status does not justify special immunity. 

The Court instead disposes of these cases by holding that 
respondents’ complaint seeks extraterritorial application of 
the ATS, but in my view, we should not decide that question 
at this juncture.  It is tied to the question whether the plain-
tiffs should be allowed to amend their complaint, and in or-
der  to  reach  the  question  of  extraterritoriality,  the  Court