October Term 2017 · Docket 16-499

Can foreign corporations face civil liability under the Alien Tort Statute?

Israeli nationals sue a Jordanian bank for wartime injuries. The bank argues U.S. courts lack jurisdiction over foreign entities.

Official caption
Jesner v. Arab Bank, PLC.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — 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.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Fisher argued that ordinary statutory construction rules apply to the Alien Tort Statute.

    Mr. Fisher stated that the traditional presumption of corporate liability controls this case.

    Mr. Fletcher argued that the claims lack a sufficient connection to the United States.

    Mr. Clement emphasized that the defendant is chartered and regulated by Jordan.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests whether the Alien Tort Statute allows suits against foreign corporations. the sides that brought the case seek to hold the bank liable for torts. The bank seeks dismissal based on its foreign status.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 11, 2017.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want the Court to affirm corporate liability under the statute.

The bank wants the Court to bar suits against foreign corporations.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue ordinary statutory construction supports holding corporations liable for torts.

The bank argues the claims lack sufficient U.S. connections to proceed.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Roberts asked about the availability of relief for foreign corporate defendants.

Justice Sotomayor asked if suing at headquarters would resolve most cases.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the scope of U.S. civil jurisdiction over foreign entities. It determines whether victims can seek redress in American courts. The outcome shapes international litigation standards for corporate conduct.

Official sources for this section

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 Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON