In Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Doe, et al., former child slaves who were trafficked into Côte d'Ivoire to work on cocoa farms filed suit under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) against U.S.-based companies that purchase cocoa from and provide other support to the farms, alleging that the companies aided and abetted child slavery. By an 8–1 vote, the Supreme Court held that the case involved an impermissible extraterritorial application of the ATS under the Court's precedent in Kiobel. The Court declined to resolve whether domestic corporations may be held liable under the ATS, although five justices across several opinions expressed the view that such corporations are not immune from ATS suits. The question of whether the Court should ever create new causes of action under the ATS prompted significant debate, with three justices suggesting that they would overrule Sosa v. Álvarez-Machain and a fourth indicating that there are strong arguments to reject judicial creation of any new ATS causes of action.

中文翻译：

---

美国最高法院就美国公司协助和教唆非法域外奴役儿童提出索赔，拒绝解决国内公司责任

在雀巢美国公司诉 Doe 等人。, 被贩运到科特迪瓦从事可可农场工作的前儿童奴隶根据《外国人侵权法》 (ATS) 对从农场购买可可并向农场提供其他支持的美国公司提起诉讼，声称这些公司帮助和教唆儿童奴役。最高法院以 8 票对 1 票裁定该案涉及根据法院在基奥贝尔. 法院拒绝解决国内公司是否可能根据 ATS 承担责任，尽管五位法官在多种意见中表达了这样的观点，即此类公司不能免受 ATS 诉讼的影响。法院是否应该根据 ATS 提出新的诉讼理由的问题引发了激烈的辩论，三位法官表示他们将否决索萨诉 Álvarez-Machain第四个表明有强烈的论据拒绝司法创造任何新的 ATS 诉讼因由。