Opinion ID: 764897
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Role of Deference to the Executive Branch

Text: 37 We accord substantial weight to the State Department's position. In Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino, 376 U.S. 398 (1964), the Supreme Court considered the right of an instrumentality of a hostile foreign government to file suit in U.S. courts. The United States had severed formal diplomatic relations with Cuba, but had not derecognized it as a sovereign. The Court rejected the argument that a hostile government should not be allowed to litigate in U.S. courts. Sabbatino looked to the executive's position in support of its decision: 38 The view that the existing situation between the United States and Cuba should not lead to a denial of status to sue is buttressed by the circumstance that none of the acts of our Government have been aimed at closing the courts of this country to Cuba, and more particularly by the fact that the Government has come to the support of Cuba's act of state claim in this very litigation. Id. at 411. 5 39 We will likewise take heed of the State Department's position here. We do not believe that executive authority in foreign policy matters is limited to the definition of foreign state for § 1332 purposes. Executive competence also extends to the definition of citizens or subjects, at a minimum in cases where the proper interpretation is unclear and the outcome may affect our foreign policy. Just as the executive is best positioned to make the determination that recognition of a sovereign is appropriate, the executive is best situated to conclude that Hong Kong was, at the time suit was filed, so closely connected to the United Kingdom that its corporations were United Kingdom subjects.