DOJ Supports Exxon Mobil In U.S. Supreme Court Case Against Cuba Companies. Now, Both Plaintiffs Before SCOTUS Have Trump-Vance Administration Support.
/Exxon Mobil Corporation, Petitioner v. Corporación Cimex, S.A. (Cuba), et al.
Docketed: December 31, 2024
Linked with: 24A330
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Case Numbers: (21-7127, 22-7019, 22-7020)
Decision Date: July 30, 2024
Excerpts:
QUESTION PRESENTED
Whether Title III of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996, 22 U.S.C. 6021 et seq., which creates for U.S. victims of unlawful expropriation by the Cuban government a damages action against those who traffic in the expropriated property, permits suit against Cuban agencies or instrumentalities, or whether such claims are barred by foreign sovereign immunity unless they also satisfy an exception codified in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, 28 U.S.C. 1330, 1391(f ), 1441(d), 1602 et seq.
INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES
This brief is submitted in response to the Court’s order inviting the Solicitor General to express the views of the United States. In the view of the United States, the petition for a writ of certiorari should be granted.
INTRODUCTION
The United States has compelling foreign-policy interests in ensuring that U.S. nationals whose assets were illegally expropriated by Fidel Castro’s communist regime receive recompense and in preventing the Cuban government from further benefiting from its wrongdoing. In the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996, 22 U.S.C. 6021 et seq., Congress provided a vital mechanism to impose accountability on the Cuban government by authorizing private parties to bring suits against “any person” who traffics in property confiscated by the Cuban government, 22 U.S.C.
This Court should grant review and hold that Title III suits against Cuban agencies and instrumentalities can proceed without having to additionally satisfy one of the enumerated exceptions to foreign sovereign immunity under the FSIA. The D.C. Circuit incorrectly superimposed the FSIA’s general framework on a narrow, Cuba-focused statute that clearly abrogates Cuban agencies’ and instrumentalities’ immunity. That erroneous holding impedes private suits against Cuban agencies and instrumentalities and stymies important foreign-policy interests in holding the Cuban government accountable for continuing to benefit from its illegal expropriations. Review is especially warranted now, during a window when the President has allowed Title III suits to proceed, and at a time when the United States believes that such suits could meaningfully contribute to American foreign-policy objectives involving Cuba.
