Posted on 03/29/2004 9:09:27 PM PST by poolstick
Sat, Mar. 27, 2004
Supreme Court to consider 1789 law used in human rights cases
PAUL CHAVEZ
Associated Press
LOS ANGELES - The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments Tuesday about a 1789 federal law that allows foreigners to sue in U.S. courts for human rights abuses allegedly committed overseas.
Human rights lawyer Paul Hoffman said justices for the first time will consider the meaning of the Alien Tort Claims Act, which has been cited by dozens of people seeking damages from individuals who tortured or otherwise abused them in foreign countries.
Hoffman, a partner in a Los Angeles law firm, represents a Mexican doctor who was kidnapped in 1990 to stand trial in Los Angeles for a drug agent's slaying. He was later acquitted.
The law also has been invoked by other plaintiffs to hold multinational corporations liable for human rights abuses allegedly committed by foreign governments to benefit the firms. Major cases working their way through federal courts involve Unocal Corp., ChevronTexaco and Occidental Petroleum, which all have denied wrongdoing.
Plaintiffs who invoke the law - originally written in the 18th century, in part, to imprison pirates - need not live in the United States, but most do. Defendants only need to be on American soil long enough to be served a complaint.
The case before the Supreme Court has implications for the government's ongoing war against terrorists.
In a legal brief, Solicitor General Theodore Olson said a lower court misconstrued laws governing arrests when it ruled Hoffman's client was illegally taken into custody. Unless overturned, the ruling "threatens the United States' ability to conduct law enforcement operations abroad to combat terrorism and international crime," Olson said.
Hoffman said the government wants the courts to stay out of the executive branch's way "when it decides to kidnap people or violate international law."
Consideration by the Supreme Court follows a 6-5 ruling last June by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the arrest and detention in Mexico of Dr. Humberto Alvarez-Machain at the request of the Drug Enforcement Administration was illegal.
The arrest came after a grand jury in Los Angeles indicted Alvarez to stand trial for the 1985 death of U.S. drug agent Enrique Camarena-Salazar. Alvarez, a gynecologist, was accused of keeping the agent alive for extended torture to find out what he knew about a drug cartel.
Low-level DEA officials approved the use of Mexican civilians to arrest Alvarez, who was flown to Texas and turned over to federal agents.
Alvarez, who spent more than two years behind bars, was acquitted in 1992 by a federal judge in Los Angeles. He returned to Mexico and sued the Mexican civilians, the United States and several DEA agents under the Alien Tort Claims Act.
A lower court ruled that he could recover damages for his detention in Mexico before his arrival in Texas and awarded him $25,000.
The 9th Circuit last June upheld the award with the possibility of more damages, ruling that the Alien Tort Claims Act allows lawsuits for alleged violations of international law.
The government appealed the decision, as did a DEA informant involved in the kidnapping.
In its ruling, the San Francisco-based appeals court did not challenge the authority of the military and the president to detain terrorists or fugitives in the name of national security.
The Supreme Court is being asked to decide if Alvarez-Machain can seek damages and to clarify when federal officers have the power to arrest someone in a foreign country. The court is expected to make its decision within three months.
It is the second time Hoffman has argued the Alvarez case before the Supreme Court. In 1992, justices ruled that the U.S. government can kidnap people from foreign countries and prosecute them over that nation's objection without violating an extradition treaty.
Human rights activists said the Alien Torts Claim Act was essentially dormant until New York resident Dolly Filartiga and her father used it in a 1979 civil lawsuit in which they won a $10.4 million judgment against a former Paraguayan police official they held responsible for the torture death of her brother.
A number of lawsuits involving the law have since been filed against multinational corporations. In support of those firms, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other organizations filed a friend-of-the-court brief urging the Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court ruling allowing damages.
They argued that Alien Tort Claims Act lawsuits undermine congressional and presidential policies and put companies at a competitive disadvantage in the international marketplace.
"It's really being abused to advance foreign policy objectives and to deter investment in these countries," said Robin Conrad, senior vice president of the chamber's litigation center.
The cases being heard Tuesday are United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 03-485, and Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 03-339.
ON THE NET
U.S. Supreme Court: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/
No Safe Haven: http://www.nosafehaven.org/
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.