9 votes affirming the 2d Circuit and dismissing the case on these facts. 5 votes that the ATS has no extraterritorial application at all (basically killing it). 4 votes that says the ATS has extraterritorial application, but only when I. conduct occurs in US (foreign defendants or plaintiffs) II. U.S. defendants (foreign plaintiffs or conduct) III. substantial U.S. interest at state (including but not limited to preventing the US from being a safe haven for "enemies of all mankind" per Sosa and Filartiga). @Mr44 I don't know who you mean by "pretty much everybody" but that's not really true at all. Not even the USG wanted to eliminate extraterritoriality entirely (though you'd have a hard time fathoming wtf the US was saying in that mess of an SG brief). What it spells out, though, is exactly that: the ATS has no extraterritorial application b/c there is nothing in the text or history of the statute to defeat the presumption of extraterritoriality. Thus any future ATS claims would have to involve conduct that occurs in the US, and probably by US defendants too (plaintiffs still have to be aliens, as per the text of the statute). It mostly eliminates any value in the ATS since most torts aliens can have a cause of action under in the US are probably covered by federal law.