Alien Tort Claims Act Case Study

Implication of the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) in the case of
Khulumani v. Barclay National Bank, Ltd.

Adopted in 1789, the Alien Tort Claims Act allowed even those who are not citizens of the United States to bring forth civil suits in U.S. courts for injuries related to violations of a U.S. treaty or international law. The plaintiffs in the case of Khulumani v. Barclay National Bank, Ltd sought damages against a collection of corporations including, but not limited to, BP, General Electric, IBM, Citigroup, Ford, GM, and Barclays. In Khulumani v. Barclay National Bank, the Second Circuit ruled that a suit against approximately fifty corporations could go forward in United States courts under the Alien Tort Claims Act.(1) The defendants were …show more content…
However, the per curiam opinion, and the three individual opinions of the judges in Khulumani, will have a great impact on future attempts to hold corporations responsible for violations of international law outside the United States. (1) The federal district court’s decision in the Khulumani case saw the district court completely dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims against Barclays on the grounds of the plaintiffs’ failure to adequately establish subject matter jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Statute. In its 1994 decision in Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, the U.S. Supreme Court held that, absent explicit Congressional direction, the federal courts should not infer that a federal securities fraud statute implies a cause of action for aiding and abetting securities fraud, when no such cause of action is expressly described in the statute.(2) U.S. District Judge John Sprizzo used the Central Bank decision as a precedent, deciding that the principal set also covers human rights. Sprizzo also moved for dismissal on the grounds that the suit raised a “political question”, and noted that a letter of interest filed by the U.S. State Department