October Term 2025 · Docket 24-856
Can a U.S. Company Be Sued for Helping Torture Committed Abroad?
People suing Cisco say it knowingly helped Chinese officials persecute Falun Gong practitioners from the United States. The Supreme Court must decide whether federal law allows lawsuits against a company for helping torture happen abroad, even when the company did not carry out the abuse itself.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official Court opinion was verified.
- — An official Court opinion 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
Cisco asked the Court to reverse the lower court and reject the method used to expand these laws. Its reasoning: no express lawsuit for helpers exists, foreign policy concerns arise, and Congress has not authorized such suits.
The United States supported Cisco. It asked the Court to decline to recognize any new norms beyond what the older framework left open. It argued helper lawsuits should not be cognizable without congressional authorization. It cited a case about financial regulators to show courts read such laws strictly.
The people suing Cisco defended the allegations described above. The approved record does not support a fuller account of the result they requested in this session.
Justice Jackson pressed why to exclude helpers from core offenses. Justice Thomas asked what the framework permits and what remains under the government's view. Justice Barrett tested whether the position extends to civil conspiracy. Justice Kagan tested a norm-by-norm approach. Justice Sotomayor tested whether the allegations fit helper standards and whether Cisco seeks to overrule the framework.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 1-9 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 1-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 45-49 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 45-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 122, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 122, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 45-11 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 45-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 39-55 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 39-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 43-29 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 43-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 35-13 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 35-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 31-43 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 31-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 42, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 29-47 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 29-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 25-13 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 25-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 41-55 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 41-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 51-55 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 51-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-27 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 53-21 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 53-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 37-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 82, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 82, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 86, lines 13-11 — Transcript, file page 86, lines 13-11
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Cisco is an American technology company. The people suing say it knowingly helped Chinese officials persecute Falun Gong practitioners. They say the alleged help came from Cisco's work in the United States. The lawsuit relies on two federal laws that let victims sue for torture committed abroad.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 122, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 122, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 37-9
How the case got here
The lawsuit began with claims about persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in China. The people suing say Cisco worked from the United States and knew what was happening. A lower court allowed the case to proceed. The Supreme Court heard argument on April 28, 2026.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 41-49
What each side wants
Cisco asks the Court to reverse the lower court's decision. It also asks the Court to reject the method used to expand these federal laws. Either result would end the lawsuit against it.
The people suing want the case to proceed. The approved record does not state their requested result in detail. It supports only that they defend the lawsuit's theory.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 122, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 122, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 37-9
What each side says
Cisco argues these federal laws contain no ready-made lawsuit for helpers. It says the torture law does not mention helpers. Recognizing helper lawsuits would interfere with America's foreign policy, Cisco says. Only Congress can authorize that, and Congress has not. It denies the factual story told about its conduct.
The United States supports Cisco. It says courts should not allow helper lawsuits under either law. Congress must decide, and it has not. It cites one case about financial regulators to support strict reading. It also worries that private lawsuits can clash with the Executive's management of world affairs.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 122, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 122, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 37-9
What the justices asked
Justice Jackson asked why helper liability should be excluded from the core offenses. She asked whether it is a separate lawsuit or part of an existing one.
Justice Thomas asked what lawsuits the older framework would allow, and what remains of it under the government's approach. The Chief Justice noted tension between that framework and the government's position and asked how to reconcile them. One query asked about lower courts weighing executive foreign-policy statements.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 39-55 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 39-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 43-29 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 43-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 35-13 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 35-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 42, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 25-13 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 25-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-9
Why it matters
This case could decide whether American companies face lawsuits for helping abuses abroad. If the Court sides with Cisco, victims would need Congress to act first. If not, similar lawsuits could proceed against other companies. The case also tests how far courts may read old laws to fit new situations.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 122, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 122, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 37-9
What the Court decided
Courts cannot create new lawsuits under the Alien Tort Statute, so plaintiffs cannot use it to sue for helping violations. The Torture Victim Protection Act, which lets victims sue those who torture, does not allow suing helpers.
The Ninth Circuit's judgment was reversed and the case was sent back for further proceedings.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Opinion — file page 2, lines 1-1 — Opinion, file page 2, lines 1-1
- Official Supreme Court Opinion — file page 4, lines 1-1 — Opinion, file page 4, lines 1-1
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Verified official opinions and orders
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 122, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 122, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 37-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 122, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 122, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 55-55 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 55-55
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 37-9
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 3 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Removed an unsupported statement that the Court had not ruled; the available source set did not establish that absence.
- Revision 4 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Corrected unsupported no-ruling language and clarified that the article's disposition summary is incomplete.
- Revision 5 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Added the holding and disposition from the verified official Court opinion.
- Revision 6 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.