October Term 2017 · Docket 16-1220
Must U.S. courts accept a foreign government's statement of its own law?
the sides that brought the case seek independent review of Chinese law. the opposing sides demand strict deference to the Chinese government's interpretation.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Gottlieb argued that district courts are not bound to accept foreign sovereign statements.
He stated that courts must assess clarity, completeness, and consistency of such statements.
Mr. Jacobson argued that the 2002 regulation only makes sense under the Ministry's interpretation.
He claimed that price fixing was clearly required under that specific regulatory regime.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 27-51 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 27-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 47-47 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 47-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 39, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 39, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-53 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 53-1 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 53-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-37
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the limits of judicial deference to foreign sovereigns. The core dispute involves how U.S. courts should treat official statements from foreign governments about their own legal systems.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 39, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 39, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-51
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 24, 2018.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 53-1 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 53-1
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want courts to independently verify foreign law when statements seem unclear or inconsistent.
the opposing sides want courts to give conclusive weight to the foreign government's official interpretation.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 39, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 39, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-51
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue that courts must retain the power to question foreign legal statements for clarity and consistency.
the opposing sides argue that domestic precedent supports giving conclusive weight to foreign administrative determinations.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 39, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 39, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-51
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked about the bottom line of the argument.
Justice Breyer questioned the specific language used regarding deference to reasonable interpretations.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 27-51 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 27-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 47-47 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 47-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-53 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 53-1 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 53-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-37
Why it matters
This dispute defines the boundary between judicial independence and international comity. It determines how U.S. courts handle conflicting claims about foreign legal obligations. The outcome shapes the practical application of foreign law in American courts.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 39, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 39, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-51
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 27-51 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 27-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 29-41 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 29-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 47-47 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 47-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-53 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 53-1 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 53-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-37
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 39, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 39, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 39, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 39, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-51
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.