Filartiga v. Pena-Irala

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980 · Federal Courts

Federal CourtsAlien Tort StatuteCustomary International LawJurisdictionAlien Tort Statute28 U.S.C. § 1350law of nationscustomary international law

Facts

For purposes of the appeal, the court accepted as true the complaint's allegations that Americo Norberto Pena-Irala, then Inspector General of Police in Asuncion, kidnapped, tortured, and killed seventeen-year-old Joelito Filartiga in retaliation for his father's political opposition to the Paraguayan government. The plaintiffs, Joelito's father and sister, were Paraguayan citizens, and Pena was also a Paraguayan citizen. After Pena entered and remained in the United States on a visitor's visa, Dolly Filartiga learned he was in Brooklyn and caused him to be served with process while he was detained pending deportation. The complaint sought civil damages and invoked, principally on appeal, the Alien Tort Statute.

Issue

Whether alleged deliberate torture committed under color of official authority by one foreign national against another in Paraguay constitutes a tort committed in violation of the law of nations so as to create federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1350. Also, whether exercising such jurisdiction is consistent with Article III.

Rule

The law of nations is determined from the usage and practice of nations, judicial decisions, and the works of jurists, and it must be interpreted as it exists in the modern world. Official torture of a person held in detention is prohibited by universally accepted norms of customary international law, without distinction between a state's treatment of aliens and its own citizens. Therefore, when an alien sues for a tort only alleging such torture, and the defendant is found and served within the United States, § 1350 supplies federal jurisdiction.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Lucia Benitez, a citizen of Argentina, files a damages action in federal court in Miami against Raul Mena, a former prison warden from Argentina. She alleges that while she was jailed during a political protest in Cordoba, Mena personally ordered guards to apply electric shocks during interrogation, and Mena was personally served while attending a trade expo in Florida.

Is federal subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1350 most likely proper?

Explanation. Section 1350 covers a civil action by an alien for a tort only committed in violation of the law of nations. The majority held that deliberate torture perpetrated under color of official authority violates universally accepted norms of customary international law, regardless of the parties' shared nationality, and that jurisdiction exists when the alleged torturer is found and served within the United States.