RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community, 579 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act has certain extraterritorial applications, but that plaintiffs must prove injuries within the United States for the Act to apply.[1] The decision received criticism in the Harvard Law Review for potentially restricting access to American courts for litigants from outside the country.[2]
RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community | |
---|---|
Argued March 21, 2016 Decided June 20, 2016 | |
Full case name | RJR Nabisco, Inc., et al. v. European Community et al. |
Docket no. | 15-138 |
Citations | 579 U.S. ___ (more) 136 S. Ct. 2090; 195 L. Ed. 2d 476 |
Holding | |
A violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act may be based on a pattern of racketeering that includes predicate offenses committed abroad, provided that each of those offenses violates a predicate statute that is itself extraterritorial. However, a private RICO plaintiff must allege and prove a domestic injury. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Alito, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas; Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan (Parts I, II, and III) |
Concur/dissent | Ginsburg, joined by Breyer, Kagan |
Concur/dissent | Breyer |
Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. |
The case was brought by the European Union's member states. RJR Nabisco (and several subsidiary organizations) were accused of engaging in cigarette smuggling and tax evasion.
See also
editReferences
edit- ^ Liptak, Adam (June 20, 2016). "Supreme Court Sides With R.J. Reynolds in RICO Case". The New York Times. Retrieved June 27, 2017.
- ^ "RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community". Harvard Law Review. 130. November 10, 2016.
External links
edit- Text of RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community, 579 U.S. ___ (2016) is available from: Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived)