U.S. racketeering law abroad

1. The law of extraterritoriality provides guidance in determining RICO’s reach to events outside the United States. The Court applies a canon of statutory construction known as the presumption against extraterritoriality: Absent clearly expressed congressional intent to the contrary, federal laws will be construed to have only domestic application. Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 561 U. S. 247, 255. Morrison and Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 569 U. S. ___, reflect a two-step framework for analyzing extraterritoriality issues. 2. The presumption against extraterritoriality has been rebutted with respect to certain applications of RICO’s substantive prohibitions in §1962. 3. Irrespective of any extraterritoriality of §1962’s substantive provisions, §1964(c)’s private right of action does not overcome the presumption against extraterritoriality, and thus a private RICO plaintiff must allege and prove a domestic injury. 764 F. 3d 129, reversed and remanded.

Result

Reversed

The Court said federal laws generally apply only in the United States unless Congress clearly indicates otherwise. It found that rule overcome for some RICO prohibitions, but not for private RICO lawsuits, which require an injury in the United States.

Majority author

Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

Majority

Clarence Thomas, Anthony M. Kennedy, John G. Roberts, Jr., Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

Dissenting

Stephen G. Breyer, Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg

The case returns to the appeals court for another look under the rules the Supreme Court announced.